In my opinion, it doesn't matter if it looks like Slack. What matters is that I can deploy it on an existing infrastructure and still have control over the service instead of handing over control to a third-party.
> What matters is that I can deploy it on an existing infrastructure and still have control over the service instead of handing over control to a third-party
And its nice to be able to choose which apps you want to use on all the different platforms; and choose differently than everyone else. The app that works for me isn't necessarily the app that works for others, but I still want to be able to talk to them using the app I want.
Let's chat is really neat, I've played with it a lot but I have to say that the combination of not supporting OTR & The fact that it relies on MongoDB put me off using it in production to replace our existing chat server.
"Familiar", eh? To me it's still "that weird new hipchat competitor people keep talking about", but it's still something operating at a couple of degrees' remove: I've never used it or met anyone who uses it or heard of any reason to use it, and the one time I went to the website it wasn't clear that there was any way for random people to sign up for it. I'm curious why you see it as the established standard - isn't it basically brand new?
Slack built up $11m in annual revenue in a really short time, and is adding $1m in contracts every 11 days. At what's about $7/person/month, that's a lot more than no one.
