Yes, I share your opinion. I prefer PieFed. It has some quirks you’re bound to notice once you use it. A few missing things here and there, like the ability to upload pictures in comments. And people keep complaining about the lack of an app (while I think the prgressive web app is perfectly fine). But we get lots of other features in turn that are missing on Lemmy. Like the topics you mentioned. We have initial support for Wikis and lots of other things. And I like the technical design. Seems the underlying framework is far less complex than what Lemmy is based on. Which makes PieFed relatively robust, easier on the resources(?) or at least easier to fix once something goes wrong. And the small community is very impressive in improving all sorts of minor and major aspects of the platform. It’s a bit difficult to compare both projects since they also operate on a different scale. We don’t know if Piefed would be able to handle the several thousands of users of an active Lemmy instance. We’d need to grow to that size to find out. All I can say is, it’s impressive and works well for what it is right now.
It being Python rather than Rust should help it grow features more quickly, though as you alluded might not scale as well - we’ll see, though in the meantime it sends ~25-fold less data per request for the front page iirc, so network wise (if not quite server side) it seems off to a great start!
When the Thunder fork is ready that’s going to be a huge milestone. I still think that the web UI is necessary to draw people in, without having to say “download this app, make an account, and then you can view it”. But they both, and also the backend as well, will improve over time.
Yes, I share your opinion. I prefer PieFed. It has some quirks you’re bound to notice once you use it. A few missing things here and there, like the ability to upload pictures in comments. And people keep complaining about the lack of an app (while I think the prgressive web app is perfectly fine). But we get lots of other features in turn that are missing on Lemmy. Like the topics you mentioned. We have initial support for Wikis and lots of other things. And I like the technical design. Seems the underlying framework is far less complex than what Lemmy is based on. Which makes PieFed relatively robust, easier on the resources(?) or at least easier to fix once something goes wrong. And the small community is very impressive in improving all sorts of minor and major aspects of the platform. It’s a bit difficult to compare both projects since they also operate on a different scale. We don’t know if Piefed would be able to handle the several thousands of users of an active Lemmy instance. We’d need to grow to that size to find out. All I can say is, it’s impressive and works well for what it is right now.
Pre-xactly!:-)
It being Python rather than Rust should help it grow features more quickly, though as you alluded might not scale as well - we’ll see, though in the meantime it sends ~25-fold less data per request for the front page iirc, so network wise (if not quite server side) it seems off to a great start!
When the Thunder fork is ready that’s going to be a huge milestone. I still think that the web UI is necessary to draw people in, without having to say “download this app, make an account, and then you can view it”. But they both, and also the backend as well, will improve over time.