Please don't require credit card information when you advertise a link on that page as "Launch and use Kandan now". And especially not when that credit card information is required as the second step in an initially single-step seeming sign-up process -- and also, please don't hide all of this behind a big "Launch" button.
Credit card info is only required for the second app launch, or when you invite more than two people. We have to do that to manage our resources, but we definitely didn't want it to be the first thing you see. If you send me your account email , I'll bump you to a verified account manually so you don't hit that :)
Edit: You can send it at email@example.com or just click on the support link in-app, and you'll get a modal form to contact us.
Agree. It's especially obnoxious if it comes from the author himself. It's the equivalent of having a tagline saying "I'm a smart developer who works hard" - it might be true but it's not your call, it's just a counter-signal.
On second thought, I guess my criticism is more personal than yours, but I really think it's a kind of pollution that has no place in a somewhat clean community such as HN.
EDIT: I do like the look of it, but I think everyone would be better of if you (you as in Cloudfuji, not the specific designer in question) used a neutral language. If someone goes on to say in the comments "That's beautiful." it's worth so much more for everyone involved.
I came here just to write exactly the same thing. I'd add that in this case, I personally don't find the product beautiful at all. It's not ugly, I don't find it visually offensive, but it's fairly generic and uses too many cliches for me to find it beautiful.
Of course, beauty is mostly subjective. In order to wield it like, say, Apple does sometimes, you have to make something that a strong majority will find unusually beautiful.
> Not everything on the web needs to be 'beautiful'.
Is there anything in nature that isn't beautiful? Beauty comes from the optimal intersection of form and function; in nature, this balance is reached through evolution. That's what we should be striving for.
Not everything needs to be beautiful, but we wanted to Kandan to be. We had a prototype of Kandan we called Kogo initially, but it was pretty ugly. We went out of our way to make sure that Kandan was as pleasant to use as possible, visually and functionally.
It's a plain chat layout with too much whitespace for my taste.
You know what's beautiful? A chat that I can theme and customize to match my definition of beautiful.
This one doesn't even meet the minimum requirement of not being trapped in a browser. I want working keyboard shortcuts, I want detachable windows, and I want to copy/paste properly (browser chats give a garbled mess because your fancy CSS layout does not survive the process).
I think Chat is one of those core services, like Email that has standardized around one common standard. People use a wide variety of clients, and very different uses from basic to power user needs. The reason most chat services fail is that even if they have fantastic mobile and web clients, they cannot provide the sheer range of clients needed for the entire range of use cases.
At Chartboost, we've tried pretty much every protocol there is, but we still stick to IRC. It's the only protocol that has clients that suit all of us, from hardcore `irssi` to newbie Adium integration. There's also bouncers and solid local histories and it's easy to hop onto tech channels for some help and it's widely supported with chatbots and libraries for building your own chatbot. (eg. Ruby-IRC)
Thanks - Akash Manhor (https://twitter.com/hashnuke) made both of those decisions early on in Kandan's life. There have been challenges around both, but overall it's worked out very well - in fact, the faye interface opens up some really interesting possibilities. We'll have some examples of this soon.
This is great, I admit the design is pleasing, but I gotta ask the obvious question here which is... what is wrong with Campfire or HipChat or the multitude other group chat apps that have sprung up in recent years? (not counting that Kandan is opensource, which is pretty cool)
I wanted some of these features in Campfire for years, but I couldn't just fork Campfire and give the features back. Now I , and others, can.
Most people don't want to run their own services, but they want to be able to fix bugs and add features when they feel like it. Cloudfuji's model lets everyone do that, and app authors to make sustainable revenue.
And thanks for bringing that up, it's an important question!
From the source of the app (https://github.com/cloudfuji/kandan), it seems that it doesn't check for authorization -for now-, so be aware that anyone can signup to your own private instance if they know your url and do nasty things like deleting channels.
Good point - we wanted to keep it as open as possible, and as easy to get started as possible. Hence the (literally) copy/paste instructions to get running on somewhere like Heroku, with no need to provision other services.
This app does have a really great design, especially when a lot of open source apps are lacking in this department. I'm really impressed with Sacha's work, and have really enjoyed his "Step by Step UI Design" ebook, which details his design process for Kandan.
I personally would love to see it be a self-contained irc/xmpp/jabber/faye server, but all in good time. We want to make open-source beautiful, easy to access, and easily extensible. So we're releasing what we have now, with plenty of momentum towards things like providing an XMPP backend!
I am happy to see IRC here. Way underused communication method! Certainly are things that can be improved with the protocol and services, but few people understand how useful it can be for business aswell as personal chat-needs.
I tried to change url of my application, but it doesnt seem to be working. There is just no button to submit the form with application settings, I tried to sumbit it in other way, but it made no visible effect