Learn how Cinny and Macro Chat differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these team chat & messaging tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
9 hours agoRepository age
6 yearsVersion
v4.12.8License
AGPL-3.0Repository
cinnyapp/cinny
Last 30 days
Last commit
8 hours agoRepository age
1 yearVersion
v2026.11.2.0License
AGPL-3.0Repository
macro-inc/macro
Both Cinny and Macro Chat have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Macro Chat leads in popularity with 6,083 stars vs 3,961 stars for Cinny. The 54% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Cinny has 607 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Macro Chat is growing faster, adding 1,543 stars in the last 30 days (+34%) against adding 45 stars for Cinny (+1.1%). Macro Chat is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Cinny last updated 9 hours ago and Macro Chat 8 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Cinny uses SCSS while Macro Chat leverages Bash, Python, Rust, C, Objective-C, Swift, Kotlin, Tauri.
Cinny has been in development longer, starting 6 years ago, compared to Macro Chat which began 1 year ago. This 4.6-year head start suggests Cinny may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Team Chat & Messaging. However, they also have distinct specializations: Cinny also focuses on Encrypted Communication, Decentralized Social Networks.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs