IRC is an ancient, rickety piece of crap, and a disproportionate amount of IRC server functionality addresses problems most people do not have, like synchronizing multiple relay servers. I grew up on IRC, have spent a lot of time in the ircd source code, and I can't imagine why anyone would waste time using it in 2009.

So, I think along with "time" and "expertise", you should also add "tolerance for needless pain".

You know, last time I checked, the BSD devs were still using icb. Maybe Campfire is also for the people without the time or expertise to set up icb. =)

Who are you? Millions still use IRC.

Millions of people still use Windows 98. What's your point?

WHAT??? Ok that analysis of IRC is just surreal. like cuil^cuil.

Try adding some content to your reply, axod. Start by responding to these:

* IRC runs its own custom protocol, which firewalls go out of their way to block.

* IRC has archaic limits like 7-bit clean text and short lines.

* IRC requires custom client software.

* IRC can't natively include binary data, images, or rich content.

* IRC can't provide transcripts without more archaic software to log in and watch channels.

* IRC's authentication support is significantly worse than that of the web.

* IRC's authorization features are limited to chankeys and +i.

IRC is proven. It has kick ass features to deal with abuse, spam etc. (You know, the things you need when you actually have users)

It's in use on millions of websites. It's the most used groupchat protocol on the internet.

So I'm not quite sure where you get your data from.

Maybe you personally hate IRC for some reason, but to say "I can't imagine why anyone would waste time using it in 2009." Is just idiotic.

You're on crack. IRC is not the most used groupchat protocol on the Internet. Most Internet users have never heard of IRC, but the overwhelming majority of them have an IM address somewhere that does group chat.

By "in use on millions of websites", I presume you're cheating by saying that any website that mentions IRC is "using" IRC.

Obviously the big ones - ustream, jtv...

Here's a few more.

http://www.quantcast.com/p-1as4Vqt4eFyrI/traffic/syndicators

Compared to MSN / Sametime / Facebook Chat / Yahoo Chat / AOL Chat / etc - I don't think ustream or jtv are very big.

I'm not trying to cast aspersions on your front-end work, but why-oh-why would you use IRC as your backend? Icb is "proven" too.

If you were building a website, would you use HTML, which completely sucks and is an abomination, or would you create a fantastic new system with its own browser?

I would use HTML, but I really don't think HTML is an abomination. Whereas IRC clearly is, and it's not hard to replace, unlike HTML.

You could probably change Mibbit to use the MibbitChat protocol and most of your users would never care.

Why do you assume that's not my longer term plan?

I already layer things ontop of IRC such as typing notify, recent chat on channel join etc...

IRC is a simple, solid chat protocol. It's about as ugly and broken as HTML IMHO.

You don't get users by forcing them to use some swanky new protocol/system off the bat. That's a recipe for quick failure.

I'm doing some IRC stats for langpop.com, and if you want technical help, someplace like Freenode is still the place to be. Where can you get Ruby help on IM?

It is certainly true that IRC is the leading group chat system for hackers.

Guess you don't click on peoples profiles much...

It's not my fault you're building a company on a protocol from 1989. =)

You know, I made the same mistake in 1998; we started (and got funded) a company that basically took IRC and:

* Added arbitrary TLV encoded data to messages

* Used link state routing to solve the netsplit problem

* Used FEC to provide reliability over the resulting mesh network

But even though you've kept current on IRC and I wrote it off a long time ago, I'm pretty sure I can still win an argument that IRC is archaic and ready to go.

Meh seems to be working fine for me thanks :) Plenty of people are building companies based on HTML also you know. I don't quite see your point...

Those problems you 'solved' are not problems any user cares about though. They want IRC to be easy, and usable as a webchat.

Oh I totally agree, the world did not need a BitTorrent/IRC combination in 1999, or in 2009.

But the world certainly wants to be able to upload files and images into group chats. No user cares about IRC; they want group chat to be easy as using a website.

You can't win the argument, because millions of people are still using it, and it's growing...

I assume your startup failed. Perhaps that's tainted your view a tad.

My 1999 startup did not fail because I made the wrong bet about the ancient IRC protocol. IRC isn't "growing" just because you stuck a web front end on it and started counting page views. Like I said, the overwhelming majority of your users could care less what the protocol is behind it.

You are the opposite of right; IRC is dying, and will be replaced with web chat systems with backend protocols nobody thinks about.

"started counting page views"

Why would I count page views? Counting profit is much more fun.

I think you'll see an explosion in online webchat this year and next, and IRC will be one of the clear winners. I don't like the protocol, it's a complete mess to be honest, but that's what'll happen.