Discord Alternatives, Ranked
121 points
12 hours ago
| 17 comments
| taggart-tech.com
| HN
aaravchen
2 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

reply
mastermage
15 minutes ago
[-]
Excuse me wtf
reply
bob1029
18 minutes 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.

reply
shreyaspapi
1 hour 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.

reply
joshuat
29 minutes ago
[-]
IRC → perfection, impossible to improve
reply
mastermage
15 minutes ago
[-]
isn't IRC only Text? What about the Voice Chat?
reply
apitman
1 hour 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.

reply
vaylian
35 minutes ago
[-]
What is your greatest UX concern that you would like to see fixed?
reply
MarsIronPI
3 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.

reply
fishgoesblub
2 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.
reply
cookiengineer
2 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)

reply
aaravchen
1 hour 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.
reply
worble
11 minutes 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.

reply
Groxx
1 hour ago
[-]
And unlike Matrix(/Element), it works most of the time.
reply
phailhaus
2 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.

reply
emmelaich
24 minutes 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.
reply
sdrinf
41 minutes 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.

reply
cbdumas
2 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.

reply
SkiFire13
1 hour 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.

reply
ekropotin
1 hour ago
[-]
How about good’ol IRC?
reply
Mashimo
39 minutes 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.

reply
notepad0x90
3 hours ago
[-]
reply
koolala
1 hour ago
[-]
Zulip actually looks pretty good if they made it a little sexier.
reply
yoavm
17 minutes ago
[-]
Sounds like it doesn't look good, then?
reply
thefz
1 hour 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.
reply
Brajeshwar
3 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.
reply
DeathArrow
56 minutes ago
[-]
What about good old IRC?
reply
hippycruncher22
4 hours ago
[-]
Cool
reply
jszymborski
3 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

reply
mgrandl
2 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!
reply
ziml77
1 hour ago
[-]
If an option doesn't have that then it's not a Discord alternative for me or many of my friends.
reply
busterarm
2 hours ago
[-]
Aside from Discord, nobody has gotten this right since Yahoo! Live and Tinychat. Both are dead.
reply
stryan
2 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.
reply
aaravchen
1 hour 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(?)
reply
warmedcookie
2 hours ago
[-]
It would be nice if Valve filled in the gaps here. They already got a lot of community features built into Steam.
reply
stryan
2 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.

reply