Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Flowdock vs Rocket.Chat, the Slant community recommends Flowdock for most people. In the question“What is the best team chat software?” Flowdock is ranked 4th while Rocket.Chat is ranked 7th. The most important reason people chose Flowdock is:
An easy & simple interface to filter chat discussion into separate threads.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Threaded discussions
An easy & simple interface to filter chat discussion into separate threads.
Pro Drag and drop file sharing
Files can be dragged and dropped in to the flow dock screen for upload.
Pro Multi-platform
Browser Based, as well as:
- iPhone and iPad App
- Android App
- Mac OS X App
Pro Stored chat history
Content and discussions are stored forever.
Pro Smart pastes & code syntax highlighting
Pro Private chat option
Able to speak privately/talk head-to-head.
Pro Notification system
A specific user or everyone in the channel can be notified via @user or @everyone respectively.
Pro A full developer API
Flowdock API allows developers the freedom to create custom integrations.
Pro Create and assign PRs from Flowdock
You can interact with Github directly from Flowdock to create PRs.
Pro Free for teams of five, non-profits and students
Pro Data exports
Back up conversations and files fully at any time.
Pro Add Tools
On top of our 50+ custom integrations, easily integrate any tool that sends emails or generates RSS feeds, as well as having the option to build a custom integration with Flowdock's API
Pro Status updating
Allows co-workers to know what you’re up to "/status I'm busy today!"
Pro Google Apps Integration
Google Apps get a Flowdock link to the Apps tool-bar and won't have to separately manage users
Pro Typo Fix-ups
Pro Able to host users external to your team
When working with stakeholders (clients or partners) you can add organizations to manage internal privacy
Pro Free and open source
Rocket.Chat is available for free. It's licensed under the MIT license with source code available on GitHub.
Pro Native apps for all major desktop and mobile platforms
Rocket.Chat has native apps for macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS and Android.
Pro Supports a wide variety of authentication methods
In addition to the usual email / username + password combination, Rocket.Chat supports authenticating via Facebook, Github, Gitlab, Google, Linkedin, Meteor and Twitter accounts.
Pro Understands markdown better than Slack does.
Links work properly, for instance, with square brackets followed by parentheses.
Pro Very active and helpful community
Pro Video conferencing support
Rocket.Chat supports video calls.
Cons
Con Proprietary (non-free/libre)
Con No self-hosting available
If you are worried about third-parties getting access to your data you should consider self-hosting. With self-hosting you are in control over where your data is stored, who has access to it. You will also not be vulnerable to exploits of a third-party provider.
Con Buggy android app
Google sign up didn't work, then after going to the website to do the sign up, the invite team members screen was broken.
Con Free only for small teams, non-profits or students
Unless it's used by a team of less than five people, a non-profit or students, Flowdock will cost $3/mo per person.
Con Developer support is non-existent
Can't even create a clean Ubuntu VM with a working developer install. Unresolved dependencies; fails to build. Docs are terrible; actual devs don't respond to questions; error messages are near-opaque. DO NOT RECOMMEND.
Con Web client loses images
In chat rooms with images, before very long, images start to become empty boxes. Useless to pass around visual information
Con No theme customization
Con No chat audit for enterprise
Con Poor security implementations / protocols
Con Centralized
Con iOS app is poorly made
The iOS application is not native, being just a browser container. This means that the UX is quite poor, slow, buttons unresponsive. At this moment they do not provide a decent experience.
Con Android app is poorly made
The Android application is just a badly wrapped web-view which does not perform well and has no form of offline caching whatsoever.
Con Privacy settings are absent
Privacy settings for the server are absent, for instance, you don't have the ability to disable registrations, there's no way to control access to the chat.
Con Features not available out of the box
Con No web browser support
Con Email required for registration
Con No way to block new registrations
Without the ability to disable registrations, there's no way to control access to the chat.
