Teams shouldn’t be underestimated. It’s pretty great, and comes with a lot of great tools that no unicorn has found a way to replace.

It is currently abhorrent. They do appear to be updating regularly, but so much of the UX should have been fixed at the beginning.

- Messages don't get delivered for hours on mobile. - UX is so bad I don't think they are even dog fooding. eg, copy and paste a code block and it will capture a bunch of meta information - teams aren't followed by default, so half the team had no idea the data was there - this means nobody uses teams but chats, which are only recently pinnable (!?!?) - the pages, plugins and sharepoint files is great, but too restrictive.

Compared to Slack or Zulip, it is still very behind. However, once our 70k organisation moved to office 365 and started using teams, we sheepled and didn't want the team to use a fragmented tool and bit the bullet. So yeah. Watch out for teams.

Yeah, we use teams and have had none of those issues. In fact, I'd say it is better than Slack now, which is what we used before switching to Teams last fall. Plus Teams is in the whole Microsoft enterprise bundle already. Slack's biggest challenge will be Teams. Or their enterprise market share will boil down to, enterprises not using Microsoft, .. so Google...

You're describing 12 months ago Teams. It's come a long way.

Some of my co-workers switched to Teams. They show up as offline on Skype for Business.

I haven't moved to it yet because I require a chat application that works and allows people to contact me.

People showing up as offline doesn't affect the ability to send them messages, though.

Teams has it's own issues, but messages getting delivered isn't one of them.

One little detail: the MS offering should work adequately.

If Lync (Skype for Business) is any indication, building well-working enterprise messaging is hard. Unless cost-cutting is your central concern, you want your internal communication to use the best, least-friction tools. Here Slack has quite an advantage.

What advantages does Slack have over Zoom? Microsoft Teams seems to compete more with the latter than the former.

Zoom and Slack are very different products.

99% of value of Slack for our team is in the text-related features.

Yes, I know, but it seems most of the value Microsoft Teams provide is in its video conferencing capabilities. Why is Slack said to be competing with one and not the other?

You think enterprise companies switch a product they’re already using with all the integrations to another (possibly inferior) product just because of price? That’s not usually been my experience

No, the switch to a product that is fully integrated with another more important product that they already use.

And with Flow adding integrations all the time Microsoft are real close to a killer Business product.

Seriously, Flow is good stuff.

That’s the definition of Enterprise Software - the buyer is not the user. They are already paying for Office. Why pay extra for Slack? You really don’t want to go head to head with Microsoft’s Enterprise sells.

> The enterprise customers are the least likely to stay. What happens when Microsoft Teams gets “good enough”

Also, Google Chat. AFAIK it's free if your company is already using the work version of Gmail, though don't quote me on that. It's out now, and does the job well enough.

My current employer went with Google Chat, I think mainly due to the cost difference with 10k+ employees.

Would you really trust any messaging platform from Google? They have a new one every year.

Anecdotally I changed to 365 just for the storage capacity, I don't even use Ms Office apps.

> What happens when Microsoft Teams gets “good enough”

Or Salesforce Chatter. Enough companies handing Salesforce good money that adding this on makes sense.

I've never worked anywhere where Salesforce was available outside of select teams. In fact, last time I had access to it I kept finding my access had been 'lent' to another user because the per seat license was so expensive.