| BirdyChat | Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | BirdyChat | Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | — | 4.9 ★ |
| Total reviews | 0 | 8.9k |
| Active installs | 0+ | 3,000,000+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
Based on the data on this page, Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) is the stronger choice for most WordPress Plugin Directory site owners — 4.9★ vs BirdyChat's 0.0★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) has the larger user base (8,863 reviews vs 0), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. BirdyChat's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage site owners who need fast install and low risk should default to Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL); mid-market and enterprise site owners with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — BirdyChat's 0-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL)'s broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical WordPress Plugin Directory listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: BirdyChat audit • Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) audit
| Keyword | BirdyChat | Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) |
|---|---|---|
| feedback form | Not ranked | #115 |
| form | Not ranked | #144 |
| helpdesk | #207 | Not ranked |
| chat bot | #375 | Not ranked |
| custom form | Not ranked | #627 |
No tracked changes.
Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) holds the higher average rating (4.9★ vs 0.0★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the WordPress Plugin Directory. Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) has the deeper published review base (8,863 vs 0), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
BirdyChat typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (0 reviews). Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) typically suits established teams with steady usage based on its published review base (8,863 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. BirdyChat and Really Simple Security – Simple and Performant Security (formerly Really Simple SSL) both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from BirdyChat" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
