neko vs Rocket.Chat
| Tagline | Self-hosted virtual browser and screen share room for remote collaboration | Fully customizable open-source communications platform and Slack alternative |
| Category | Team Chat & Collaboration | Team Chat & Collaboration |
| Replaces | Discord, Microsoft Teams | Slack, Microsoft Teams, Discord |
| GitHub stars | 8.7k | 46k |
| Language | Go | TypeScript |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose | One-Click Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 1 month ago | 5 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
neko
- Primarily a screen-sharing tool; lacks persistent text chat or channels
- WebRTC requires open UDP ports, complicating setups behind strict firewalls
- No persistent user accounts or roles beyond admin/participant
Rocket.Chat
- Resource-heavy (Node.js + MongoDB) and can be slow at scale on modest hardware
- Some enterprise features (engagement dashboard, scalability, advanced auth) require a paid plan
- UI can feel cluttered compared to Slack
- Mobile apps have historically lagged the web client in polish
Bottom line
Choose neko if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Rocket.Chat for the larger community and ecosystem. Rocket.Chat has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Rocket.Chat
Fully customizable open-source communications platform and Slack alternative