171 pointsby pseudalopex13 hours ago26 comments
  • aaravchen3 hours ago
    Ironically, Signal actually ranks a -1 for privacy in this use. Presumably you're already using Signal and getting mainstream contacts to start using it too. You probably have a basic profile that at least includes your real name, and might also have your picture. Maybe you're even one of the 7 people in the world that use the Stories feature in it. Well good news, now all of that is also unconditionally available to anyone in any group you ever join, including any future changes you ever make to that info, unrevocably forever into the future.

    Signal has a fun dark pattern where it unrevocably grants permissions for anyone you allow to contact you to see everything in your profile for the rest of time. It has only a single trust level with contacts effectively: full trust. This is unacceptable in any tool you use for online community, unless you exclusively use it for online community and can decline to provide any info in this full-trust level. Unfortunately Signal also makes very sure you can't have a second account, by tying your account to a phone number, and only allowing one Signal instance per mobile device.

    Is Signal good? Yes, but only exclusively for communication with people you already trust.

    EDIT: typos

    • ozlikethewizardan hour ago
      You can have multiple instances of signal on a mobile device, and you can use VoiP or eSIMs to register. Signal with an online persona revealing no identifying information, registered to a cash purchased eSIM on an ungoogled android is as good as your getting. Why do you think so many jurisdictions are trying to ban both GrapheneOS and Signal.
      • OJFord3 minutes ago
        That's privacy for someone who cares deeply and will get it somehow no matter what, not default zero-effort privacy for the ignorant. (Which WhatsApp does pretty well for example.)
      • dns_snek12 minutes ago
        You can do all of that but you shouldn't have to when using a privacy-focused messenger, and most people won't so they'll be exposed and suffer the consequences if they use Signal expecting a certain level of privacy (and pseudo-anonymity).

        It's a terrible anti-feature and the only reason they're not being punished for it is because there aren't many alternatives to pick from.

    • mastermagean hour ago
      [flagged]
  • Eloshaan hour ago
    One of the main problems in suggesting Discord alternatives is that Discord itself is an amalgamation of several apps itself.

    For some a Discord alternative needs to be a voicecall, for others it‘s game streaming, and for others it‘s a chat/bulletinboard/newsgroup.

    • Imustaskforhelp8 minutes ago
      > We are also currently working on a privacy-focused alternative called Kloak, which is in its very early alpha stage. We would greatly appreciate your feedback on areas for improvement and any expectations you may have for the platform.

      Doesn't Matrix essentially satisfy all of them?

      Although the bulletinboard/newsgroup feature is something that I don't know but I feel as if that can be on matrix as well.

      Yes, I know Matrix is hard to host but I don't imagine discord if they release their source code to be easy either.

      So for a discord-like experience, I really prefer matrix.

  • bryanhoganan hour ago
    The title is about "Discord alternatives", the major core metric is:

    > Functionality: can it do everything required of a platform for building, organizing, and sustaining a community?

    Feels like these are two different things.

    What I expect from a Discord alternative is text messaging, voice and video call with screensharing, both possible on community spaces and with personal contacts in a way that is extremely easy to setup.

    • Mashimo38 minutes ago
      Discord can do quite a lot, which results in people using it in different ways.

      I'm quite active on multiple discord server and yet never use voice / video. But I get why people use it.

      If OP is looking for a platform not to replace Discord 1 to 1, but overall to have a community why not do a broader comparison. Then everyone can for themself see what fits their personal needs.

      > I expect from a Discord alternative is text messaging, voice and video call with screensharing, both possible on community spaces and with personal contacts in a way that is extremely easy to setup.

      Same. I'm somewhat sad that a lot of the FOSS community got stuck with IRC level of technology and ease of use :( I whish for more projects would subscribe to a low barrier of entry mantra.

      Learning reg-ex to ban a member is .. ughh

  • lakshikag33 minutes ago
    We are also currently working on a privacy-focused alternative called Kloak, which is in its very early alpha stage. We would greatly appreciate your feedback on areas for improvement and any expectations you may have for the platform.

    Here is a quick promo video as well - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekOxAg7leXM

  • yellowapplean hour ago
    > Anyway this thing [Revolt/Stoat] is so far from being ready for prime time, I only include it here to call out the project. I wish them the best and hope for good things, especially since you can self-host the server. But a lack of stability and features prevent this from being useful for anything beyond experimentation. Maybe someday.

    Curious what prompted this verdict. My only experience with Revolt/Stoat has been with the Handmade Cities instance, but said experience hasn't been anywhere near as bad as this writeup seems to suggest.

  • shreyaspapi3 hours ago
    Most Discord alternatives fail not on tech, but on polish.

    Signal → private but bad for communities

    Matrix → flexible but rough UX

    XMPP → powerful but fragmented

    Discord → centralized but frictionless

    Users pick frictionless every time. We probably don’t need new apps or protocols we need a client that works well.

    • Imustaskforhelp6 minutes ago
      > Matrix → flexible but rough UX

      Matrix's UI/UX is actually really flexible with multiple clients.

      You aren't struck with Element, you can even use TUI clients or any clients.

      For the web, the one which I really love is cinny.

      Cinny is really awesome, its UI/UX is better than discord imo.

      I recommend people to check out the matrix ecosystem of clients to see what they like, because I also liked the fractal gnu app & it has tons of clients.

      https://cinny.in/

      https://matrix.org/ecosystem/clients/

    • joshuat2 hours ago
      IRC → perfection, impossible to improve
      • throwawayk7han hour ago
        No message history while not logged in.
        • simianparrotan hour ago
          That's a feature
          • Mashimo33 minutes ago
            I would love to know why it's considered a feature for you.

            I remember messing with bouncers and reading the backlog from a 3rd party page. Bots that would ping other members when they come online. It was cumbersome.

            • dokyun6 minutes ago
              Saving logs is gross, chats should be ephemeral. In any case there's HistServ and IRCv3 /chathistory nowadays, so if you really want it you can have it.

              That all the minute garbage everyone posts is preserved forever in an unfiltered state I think is a root cause of the mental degradation that results from using Discord: kids don't have anywhere to 'post into the void' anymore. Preserving past events and relationships through oral history as opposed to a big monolithic search engine entails a far more human element to IRC.

      • mastermagean hour ago
        isn't IRC only Text? What about the Voice Chat?
        • Mashimoan hour ago
          IRC does not even have offline messages, unless you pay / host a bouncer. Which you first have to know about.

          I'm not sure if any client has solve this, but what about image / video / file hosting? You can't just drag 'n drop a image into a chat. You have to host it on a 3rd party site and link it.

          I do wonder how server management is now adays. In Discord you can host your own server with a few clicks and make it easy to adjust permissions and controls invites. I would assume IRC is also lacking behind. But would love to hear more about the current state.

          Discord has invite links, where people without the app or account can quickly join. In IRC you have the IRC:// link, but that does not work for people who don't have a client installed. Then you can do a web client link, but that is not optimal for people who already have their favorite client set up :)

          • hofrogs27 minutes ago
            In Discord you can't "host" your own "server". You can create a room (internally called a guild, misleadingly referred to as "server" in ui and by a lot of people) on THE discord server, their server, and that room can be split into channels. But the room and the server belongs to discord.
            • Mashimo22 minutes ago
              You are correct. I used Discord terminology where a "server" is a group of channels.
        • OsrsNeedsf2Pan hour ago
          Yes, GP already said it was perfection
          • hnlmorgan hour ago
            Except the reason for Discords initial success, and the literal only reason I have it installed, is for voice chat when playing certain online games.

            I love IRC, I even wrote my own IRC client in the 90s, but it’s clearly not going to be suitable for gaming in this context.

    • gsich38 minutes ago
      All of those alternatives don't have voice chat in the way discord has (or Teamspeak/Mumble).
  • apitman3 hours ago
    Matrix is the only one that offers the killer feature of Discord, which is being able to join many communities from a single login.

    Sadly Matrix has never had a good UX for me. IMO they spent too many complexity tokens on e2ee and there are simply not enough left.

    • igotdiscord2015an hour ago
      Actually, the true killer feature for discord back in the day was something much dumber, but still heavily related to on-boarding and community transference.

      You could join a discord server with a single link.

      Account creation could come later.

      Considering the competition at its heyday was Teamspeak or Skype, the mere fact you could just actually see the hell you were getting into without some stupid ass "Hol' Up!" instantly made it popular with basically everyone who didn't even know what it was.

      My account is dated June 2015 which is apparently a month after it launched, and both me and every single one of the early adopters in that channel that is still up to this day have this same story to tell. We used it because we didn't even have to login at all in the first place when we first got it.

    • vaylian2 hours ago
      What is your greatest UX concern that you would like to see fixed?
      • rebolek39 minutes ago
        randomly telling me that my connection is not secure and as a result randomly hiding messages. and then, if I try to fix it somehow, it will tell me it's nearly impossible or that they'll delete my whole history. the security model is hostile towards user.
      • dahrkaelan hour ago
        when coming back to a community after a long period of time i have to follow a trail of links to rooms that say they have been upgraded and the current one abandoned until i reach the current one. thats stupid, confusing and time wasting
      • throwawayk7han hour ago
        for me, I'd say: occasional cryptic error messages that prevent conversation, even using encrypted DM across multiple devices
  • dmonitor28 minutes ago
    What's the point of the licensing on these chat servers charging per-user when self hosting?
  • MarsIronPI5 hours ago
    I'm sad to see XMPP missing from this list. I wonder if the author was simply unaware of it or simply ignored it.

    IMO XMPP is technically superior to Matrix. It "only" needs a cross-platform high-quality, branded app àla Element. There's underlying protocol support for all the features: video/audio calls, group calls, threads and reactions. Maybe missing are custom emoji (I think?) and channel grouping (which is still in the works). And of course all these protocol features work fine with federation.

    • fishgoesblub4 hours ago
      Same here, I was hoping to see it listed in the article. XMPP is close to being right there in being able to compete with Discord. It just needs a good client with Spaces support (XEP-0503), along side user roles with permissions, and server side voice channels.
      • Semaphor2 minutes ago
        > It just needs a good client

        Generally an XMPP issue :/

        The protocol is amazing and selfhostable servers (I use prosody) are great. But The only client I enjoy is conversations, and that’s mobile while my main usage is always desktop. There are decent clients, but none I’d say are great.

    • ekianjo40 minutes ago
      Xmpp clients are completely awful on Linux desktop, and can't do voice and video chat correctly with clients on Android like Conversations
    • cookiengineer3 hours ago
      The problem with XMPP is that it's a suite of RFCs.

      It's like describing DNS, which is a conglomerate of RFCs so complex that it's unlikely to be implemented correctly and completely.

      XMPP is a design fail in that regard, because if you have to tell your chat contacts to download a different client that fulfills OMEMO or XEP-whatever specs, then yeah, ain't gonna happen for most people.

      (I am still a proponent of XMPP, but the working groups need to get their shit together to unify protocol support across clients)

      • aaravchen3 hours ago
        This has been brought up on HN before, and people smarter than me identified that this view is about 10 years out of date. Yes it's a bunch of XEPs, but there are standardized "sets" apparently that include all of the things any other similar tools do. It sounds like only very niche old/minimal XMPP clients don't support encryption by default for example, and virtually all servers have supported it for many years.
        • palata21 minutes ago
          > Yes it's a bunch of XEPs, but there are standardized "sets" apparently

          If the answer to "it's confusing" is "there are apparently standardised sets", it sounds like it is, indeed, confusing :-).

        • worblean hour ago
          Is there a recommended or "blessed" server and client combo for someone who just wants to migrate their friends off discord?

          The main site https://xmpp.org/software/ lists lots of different options but I have no idea what core/advanced means and comparing all of these would take ages.

          • mfru35 minutes ago
            Conversations is a great Android client (also brings their own backend instance if you don't want to host your own), I don't know about iOS or server though.
          • cookiengineer19 minutes ago
            The ironic part is that those software description files are meaningless. AstraChat claims Advanced in all categories, but it's a proprietary commercial software, so nobody ran any kind of test suite to verify this.

            That software list, how it's done and how it's ranked is literally confirming my initial point of critique :D

            Last time I tried out several chat clients, most of them were alpha software, had lots of bugs appearing in normal conversation flows, well, or were so broken that they broke compatibility in subminor version updates to their very same client apps.

            I just wish there was some kind of ACID test suite for XMPP or something else to reproducibly validate spec compliance. Maybe a test server or similar as a reference implementation. This way client or server maintainers would have to run their programs against the official test server to increase their compliance stats.

        • Groxx3 hours ago
          And unlike Matrix(/Element), it works most of the time.
        • an hour ago
          undefined
  • jrflowers5 minutes ago
    I like this page about how a paid forum is the best alternative to a free chat app. Trying to imagine saying “if you don’t like the whole ICQ numbers thing just buy a vBulletin license” in 2002
  • phailhaus4 hours ago
    Great writeup! Looks like this is going to be relevant very soon.

    > Tools do not make a culture; the people engaging on it do

    Absolutely, but it's also important to keep in mind that the tool has a big impact on culture by virtue of what behaviors it encourages and what limitations it has. "The medium is the message" is very true here, so think carefully about which tool you hop onto.

  • cbdumas3 hours ago
    I know I'm in the small minority of Discord users who mostly uses it as a voice chat room while gaming with my friends, but for that use case the best alternative I've found seems to be Mumble.

    I recently set up a Mumble server on my home server and it seems great so far, was able to get my friends connected pretty easily. We'll see how the voice quality and latency compare to Discord.

    • SkiFire133 hours ago
      > I recently set up a Mumble server on my home server

      That makes you an even smaller minority unfortunately. Most people are not going to set up a home server.

  • bob10292 hours ago
    I'm looking at modern browser APIs and wondering why no one else is trying certain things.

    getDeviceMedia and getUserMedia are very powerful these days. I haven't actually tested it but I believe a chromium browser would have no issue capturing the hw accelerated output from a game. You can pipe these media streams directly to WebRTC peers for playback on the other side. A server with a simple selective forwarding unit could enable larger scale meetings (100s of participants). All of this can happen in <1000 lines of JS and server code. Most of the heavy lifting happens in the browser engine. Concerns like automating browser permissions, global hot keys, etc. can be handled via electron or platform specific options like WebView2.

    Mobile clients are a bit cursed right now. The best solution is to maintain a standard client in the app stores. Forcing everyone to sign their own mobile apps is way too much friction. And you do need native for this on mobile. Browser only / PWA has no chance in hell of providing a smooth UX on iOS or Android.

  • TheChaplainan hour ago
    What most people here seem to forget, is once a social platform gains traction and especially attention from the main masses, it undoubtedly require checks and balances.

    Predators, racism, gore, pedophilia, harassment, stalking and so on..

    No matter how high you value security, these are matters that hurt real people today. If you attract the mainstream, you must deal with it.

    • user20573811 minutes ago
      I am in favor of kicking children, teenagers, and people with vulnerable minds and mental illnesses off the Internet.

      Then you won't have to make the decisions that most people suffer from.

  • koolala2 hours ago
    Zulip actually looks pretty good if they made it a little sexier.
    • trueno9 minutes ago
      my team tried it for a couple weeks. couldn't stand the threaded "only see what's important" style of chat. it's undoubtedly our least fav part of microsoft teams---the channels and the threads, we all operate in the chat tab and the channels tab has been relegated to announcement posts no one reads. huge shame zulip can't just like... have a toggle for normal chat chronology/presentation. some people have gone way too for trying to efficiency max or "cut out the noise" but chronological chat and a competent search feature will always be the goat.
    • yoavman hour ago
      Sounds like it doesn't look good, then?
  • sdrinf2 hours ago
    can someone please try running the experiment of "but what if just forking&spinning up an OSS clone, scaling up to take in the migrants, acquire network effects, collect roughly same subscription revenue, but run on just, like, 10 people?"

    Discord has a financially and politically vulnerable posture that is downstream of having to operate a very large team, raise funding, be exposed to investor market pressure. However, it is also one of the rare instances of successful consumer freemium subscription monetization. A clone does not have to pay the tuition of "what makes this specific space compelling, and want-to-pay-for"; it just have to _exists_, passively soaking up migrants from each platform shift.

    ITT WTB 3rd place for my frens.

    • dahrkaelan hour ago
      how is discords freemium successful when they are trying to put Nitro in your face at every step? trying so hard to me that sounds like not enough people pay
  • emmelaich2 hours ago
    Maybe there's a niche for Valve/Steam to step into here. They already have your data, and many people use Discord for gaming related chat.
  • ekropotin2 hours ago
    How about good’ol IRC?
    • Mashimo2 hours ago
      Fun, until you want to share an image and have to upload it to a 3rd party, have to explain what a bouncer is to someone who just wants offline messages and AFAIK voice and video chat is not possible.

      Client dependent, but channel overview per server is also not that good.

  • monoculturedan hour ago
    I would love an updated KDX/Hotline server running an a RasPi or similar at home. This was a solved problem 20 years ago. The migration to online based platforms will always lead to network effects and enshittification, for very little gain.
  • ekianjo44 minutes ago
    > signal for secrecy

    What kind of secret system uses a phone number tied to your ID as a user name?

  • thefz3 hours ago
    There is zero chance that the target users for Discord is going to try anything more complicated than Discord, so basically all the entries in this list. I recoil in horror thinking about me explaining Matrix even to the most tech savvy friends I use Discord with and I really really hope people would stop recommending it.
    • Eloshaan hour ago
      The target user group for Discord actually is children and teens. Look at that UI and how it‘s trying to sell you „swag“.

      Then, Discord is not uncomplicated. From „Servers“ not being servers, multiple account onboarding levels, to what happens when Discord believes you are a bot or are using a blacklisted IP.

      • Mashimo19 minutes ago
        I don't think I'm active on any "server" that is predominately used by Teens.

        I believe you underestimate the average age.

    • throwawayk7han hour ago
      I use matrix with several non-technical friends. Its UI/UX has improved greatly over the last two years or so.
  • Brajeshwar5 hours ago
    When you rank something with numbers, I’d love it to be more like 1 of 5 (1/5) even when you said it before. When you are reading at that line, I had to recalibrate, if that is 4 (out of 10), which is what most people try to rank against.
  • DeathArrow2 hours ago
    What about good old IRC?
  • hippycruncher225 hours ago
    Cool
  • jszymborski4 hours ago
    This does miss a major feature of Discord and why, imo, it got such an huge following among gamers at first: voice and video chat.

    I've really had a hard time finding a Discord alternative that has the same kind of first-class voice and video chat support that Discord does. Back to Ventrilo and Mumble I guess /s

    • bigstrat2003an hour ago
      Yeah I really don't get that. The biggest benefit, by far, of Discord is that it combines both text and voice chat into one! How can one seriously put forth a replacement which can't match the features Discord had on day 1?
    • stryan3 hours ago
      Matrix/Element has video rooms as a Lab function and for a while it had voice rooms too. Not sure what happened to them, but either way with MatrixRTC coming out the technical underpinnings are all there, clients just need to put it all together.
      • aaravchen3 hours ago
        Someone mentioned (I believe?) after talking to Element/Matrix at FOSSDEM this year that the organization has been struggling a lot to get this going. Apparently issues with thier project organization forking and funding the last few years has made one of thier primary contributors, who already had fully functional and working video/voice, all but give up on the project because the upstream forming means it's now forked from a commercial/defunct version of the original code(?)
    • warmedcookie4 hours ago
      It would be nice if Valve filled in the gaps here. They already got a lot of community features built into Steam.
      • stryan4 hours ago
        Steam Group Chats are sort of there; no video chat but text chats and drop-in voice chats like Discord. On the other hand they're basically ephemeral, with messages disappearing from history at some given point.

        I also can't figure out a way to access them outside of the Steam client and in DOTA where I believe they're tied to the in-game guild system.

    • mgrandl4 hours ago
      Yeah it’s so odd that none of the open-source alternatives have this feature. No video calls are not an option. We need video/voice rooms!
      • lakshikag27 minutes ago
        You might be interested in https://kloak.app I believe. It's a privacy-first alternative. It's still in early alpha days, but have most of the things set up. Oh, and we’ve got voice channels with screen sharing in beta too.
      • ziml773 hours ago
        If an option doesn't have that then it's not a Discord alternative for me or many of my friends.
      • busterarm3 hours ago
        Aside from Discord, nobody has gotten this right since Yahoo! Live and Tinychat. Both are dead.