15 comments

Add a comment…

Sign in

prestine

Your email address

Check!

invalid email

(thinking…)

Reset

or sign in with

• 
• 

UserVoice password

Forgot password?

Create a password

Your name

I agree to the terms of service

Signed in as (Sign out)

Close

Close

Post comment Submitting...

• Eric Pugh commented  ·  May 16, 2013 7:35 a.m.  ·  Delete

  I wish we had Adium integration. That would make me vote to support the swap away from Campfire. I have enough browser tabs open, I don't want another one when I have Adium running already.

• João Acabado commented  ·  July 26, 2012 11:32 a.m.  ·  Delete

  This feature is crucial to us as many people are using Skype right now. The problem is account and project managers will always have to use Skype to talk to people outside the organization but we need to make them talk with the development team via Flowdock.

  if we had XMPP and hence Skype integration, managers could talk with us via Skype under the Flowdock umbrella (right? I'm not sure I understand well the XMPP integration), benefiting all parts.

  We did a pilot 1 month ago and while everyone really liked Flowdock most of the users didn't get into the habit of using it, conversations slowly started moving to Skype as some of those inflexible managers started them on Skype. This parallell communications channel was a show-stopper for our pilot.

  Thanks for your attention.

• Drew commented  ·  April 6, 2012 12:54 p.m.  ·  Delete

  Another vote for this from a new paying user

• Adam Nelson commented  ·  March 20, 2012 3:32 p.m.  ·  Delete

  The problem here is that many potential users have Adium running for all of their other chats that are not on Flowdock. They don't want to have a web app open all the time for a message every few days.

  The heavy users I have will move to whatever solution is implemented - the hard part is getting the light users onboard - which are often the most critical people to have participating.

• Anonymous commented  ·  January 12, 2012 7:32 p.m.  ·  Delete

  Guy Frasser said, "not having a dedicated app for our "virtual watercooler" killed conversations dead."

  Guy I find the opposite to be true. I don't pay enough attention to our Flowdock instance because I can't use a more full featured desktop application to make sure it interrupts me in the right way at the right time.

  I want a count in my menu bar (I don't use the dock), I want easy integration with my exiting mobile chat application, I want to setup my own alerts and dings and flashing messages when certain things get mentioned.

  None of these wishes make sense to be integrated directly into Flowdock — they would add unneeded complexity to serve a small contingent of users. However, by providing XMPP support you provide choice and customization without needing to accommodate all kinds of bells and whistles and specific user preferences. The many varied chat applications have already done all that for us.

• rmontgomery429 commented  ·  December 14, 2011 6:00 a.m.  ·  Delete

  I want to stay connected to my team but I don't want all the other stuff. Just the conversations. Jabber integration allows those who find value in the influx feature to use the web, and those who just need to know what's going on, stay connected using their client they already have open - like ichat.

• Anonymous commented  ·  November 30, 2011 9:15 a.m.  ·  Delete

  The current mobile offering is a piece of shit, xmpp would actually work.

• AdminMikael Roos (Admin, Flowdock) commented  ·  August 19, 2011 12:38 a.m.  ·  Delete

  Nicke,

  Care to share mobile app you whipped up? :)

  You make a good point about the third party devs. It's great to receive feedback like this and I think we can be easily persuaded to advance the API. :) First up, we are however bringing a few improvements to the Influx / Team Inbox API. After that, it's time for chat.

• Nicke commented  ·  August 11, 2011 10:51 a.m.  ·  Delete

  Hello Mikael and everyone,

  I already hacked together a small mobile app for pushing stuff to our Influx using the API you launched today but I (and my team) would love if you opened up the API for the chat as well.

  Right now, the Flowdock experience on mobile doesn't even come close to the desktop experience. I understand you have lots on your plate, but that is as good a reason as any to open up your API and let us 3rd party devs get on creating great mobile clients for the various platforms out there. I'm sure you would have Android / iOS / WP7 clients out within weeks of an API becoming available.

  // Nicke

• AdminMikael Roos (Admin, Flowdock) commented  ·  July 26, 2011 12:35 a.m.  ·  Delete

  @Dan Martin:

  We are currently implementing an API for Influx, and an API for the chat will follow later down the line.

  What comes to mobile, we realize that we are still lacking there (not enough features supported, lack of notifications) and we will address that. Also, the APIs will give 3rd party developers the chance to create new things.

  I understand the general appeal for XMPP/Jabber support, but I would like to hear more about your exact use cases. Are they strictly mobile-related? Or are there other use cases as well? If you'd like to switch to private e-mail for the response, go ahead and send it to team@flowdock.com

  By the way, have you checked out the Flowdock bot which the Guys at Newsdesk developed last month, http://devcorner.mynewsdesk.com/2011/06/27/meet-flower-the-flowdock-bot/ It might come handy for you at least as a reference implementation if you're interested in developing something further yourself before the APIs come out.

  And thanks for the honest and opinionated feedback, we couldn't succeed without it!

• Dan Martin commented  ·  July 25, 2011 1:34 p.m.  ·  Delete

  @Mikael Roos: That's a disappointing response. This is why I really wish you guys had an open api. I'd rather just develop an XMPP gateway myself. It's frustrating to pay $20 / month for a service, and have to live with your preferences for which features you want to support.

  This is the second time I've wanted a feature that you've declined because it didn't really match your own personal preferences. When you have paying customers, it's not about what you want. This makes me think I should cancel my account and go back to Skype chat for free.

  Today, Flowdock really is only a desktop tool. Integrating with XMPP would mean every platform would have great clients to work with Flowdock on every platform. Having real-time access on a variety of devices in a convenient fashion is critical to a team collaboration tool.

  The mobile-web version is no answer, either. It doesn't provide notifications and such that make a compelling experience outside the desktop. Create a App icon for the app launches a new instance every time instead of taking you back to the running version. In short, it sucks to use as a mobile app.

• Guy Fraser commented  ·  May 6, 2011 10:15 a.m.  ·  Delete

  I'm not so keen on this idea. We tried something similar when we used to use Yammer - it had an XMPP/Jabber gateway. At first it seemed great, but then we realised that not having a dedicated app for our "virtual watercooler" killed conversations dead.

  Part of the beauty of Flowdock is that you see a message stream from multiple people, with the influx and other goodies in addition.

  I don't believe Flowdock should try and replace our existing IM tools - they serve their purpose as quick, transient ad-hoc chats. We will continue to use IM for that purpose.

  Flowdock is more of a continuous stream of messages that helps our distributed team of home workers feel more connected. It's the place where they ask questions - because we're not office based, they can't just turn round and ask the person next to them - because the person "next to them" is probably sat several hundred miles away!

  The one possible use I see for XMPP/Jabber connection would be to alert me to new mentions. But even then, I'm not sure I'd go through the hassle of using XMPP/Jabber for that. I'm happy to leave the flowdock desktop app running, just wish it had better visual notifications (I don't use growl btw, I'm referring to in-app notifications).

• Mika Vilpas commented  ·  October 18, 2010 11:48 p.m.  ·  Delete

  I agree with Dan Martin on this.
  My communication is focused around my irc client and it's the main place I look for messages. I already have a way to integrate xmpp into irc (bitlbee). Even though the development team mentions IRC as clumsy (https://www.flowdock.com/about), it's a really good tool!

• Dan Martin commented  ·  October 7, 2010 2:10 p.m.  ·  Delete

  To me, this is the biggest thing that Flowdock needs. Right now, I'm having a hard time convincing people on my team of the value of Flowdock. Especially at the beginning when the history data mining features are impossible to truly feel, my team wants to go back to Skype chats. They feel disconnected since we've moved our conversation to Flowdock.

  Sure, Flowdock has very helpful email integration, but it's one way. XMPP integration would hopefully be the first two-way integration, where I'd both know what people were saying in my flow without opening Flowdock.

  This will also give people a way to keep in touch with Flowdock from a smartphone.

• Daniel Renfer commented  ·  August 5, 2010 6:20 p.m.  ·  Delete

  Having a MUC that I could connect to with the same items as in chat would be awesome. Of course, I'd have to go to the site for some features.