And it's a program that is slick, intuitive, and supports so, so many use cases without ever feeling overloading.
I'm only member of 6 channels and have maybe only that many private messages open at a time, maybe it becomes more intuitive it there are more? But I don't understand how that would be.
One thing that is extra annoying is that the settings window can't be a separate window, so every time I have to adjust audio settings I get muted and lose the chat focus.
I think the UI mostly makes sense, it has a hierarchy from left to right, so it is essentially a amped-up tree-view. You could argue for actually using a tree view (a la TeamSpeak), at least on desktop, and I wouldn't disagree, but it kind of makes sense given parity with the mobile app.
I don't see a need for minimal input delay for text, compared to a code editor, as when writing natural languages, they are mostly formed in sentences and therefore have a lot of "buffer" in my brain, I don't need a closed feedback loop to type. Suppose that someone that relies on that would be rightfully befuddled with any delay.
It uses 156 megabytes of memory even on this high-volume scenario, so I would say that while baseline performance is low, it doesn't get slower, which is good.
That being said, I can always find what I want in the UI, it is rather internally consistent. The voice features are excellent and it has less outages than Slack, in my experience!
no ! it's not good ! this mindset is why everything sucks :( at no point one should have to accept that "baseline performance is low" for a software developed by a multi-hundred-million-dollar company that was almost bought by MS for a few billions
Not to mention stuffing their UI with payment prompts left and right, showing emotes you can't use in the emote menu, replacing useful screen estate with "get nitro" and "boost servers" buttons.
