Learn how Fluxer 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
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Repository

Both Fluxer 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.
Fluxer leads in popularity with 10,338 stars vs 4,385 stars for Macro Chat. The 136% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Fluxer has 765 forks, indicating moderate developer engagement.
Macro Chat is growing faster, adding 369 stars in the last 30 days (+9.2%) against adding 218 stars for Fluxer (+2.2%). Macro Chat is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Fluxer last updated 13 hours ago and Macro Chat 9 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Python, Rust. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Fluxer uses Golang, Ruby while Macro Chat leverages C, Objective-C, Swift, Kotlin, Tauri.
Both projects started around the same time, with Fluxer beginning 9 months ago and Macro Chat 11 months ago.
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: Fluxer also focuses on Encrypted Communication.
Fluxer provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Macro Chat may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs