News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by kfk on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:04PM (#24423871)
In big companies I just don’t see the point of Slack over MS Teams as they are quite similar and Teams is very low friction as it integrates with the rest of Office 365. Slack has better API and that’s great but what would be other serious competitive advantages? It almost seems to me that if you want to target big companies you need a competitor for the Office 365 platform and not “only” a competitor to one of its apps.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by shyn3 on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:12PM (#24423963)
This is what Slack really screwed up. We use 12 different meeting tools, it's absurd I know, and if Slack worked it would be great.

You start a chat and you can't add someone to the chat once it's started. So you create a new chat and add a member to it. Now you decide to hop on a call and you need to invite someone else, and that wasn't an option. But today, you can add another team member to the call. You figure out it's a vendor issue but you can't get your vendor on the call because they don't have a Slack account, and there isn't a link to share for just that one screenshare/conference.

So you are left with inviting your vendor into your Slack space which you don't want to do or move to another solution.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by specialist on Thursday September 10, 2020 @12:17AM (#24428844)
"You start a chat and you can't add someone to the chat once it's started. ..."

Yup. Those deficiencies are unforgivable.

I wonder what chat program the employees of Slack use.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by Andys on Thursday September 10, 2020 @05:14AM (#24430366)
No need for chat when you have an office to collaborate in!
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by ludamad on Thursday September 10, 2020 @12:57AM (#24429022)
Probably writing their own /s
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by jjeaff on Thursday September 10, 2020 @04:44AM (#24430202)
That would be a hillarious discovery.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by ponker on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:16PM (#24425426)
Teams is utterly devoid of charm. If your goal is to "send this string to Jim Bob" then Teams works just as well as Slack but if you want an application that's enjoyable to use for multiple hours per day, Teams is not the droid you're looking for.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by foepys on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:34PM (#24425622)
I don't care about charm in my chat application. It is supposed to deliver text and media to one or more recipients in real-time. I don't need stickers, emojis, reactions gifs, or memes. A chat is not my main application, not even in my top 10.

If it doesn't work as expected, I will try the next. There is literally 0 loyalty involved in my company.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by cwsx on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @07:55PM (#24427386)
My core problem with this comes down to UX. I don't think that falls under 'charm' but Teams feels horrible to use in comparison to Slack.

As an example, when switching to Teams to reply to a message why does it focus the search bar instead of the chat window? How often do users search (as their first focussed action) in comparison to using the chat window?

Teams seems to be full of these minor UX annoyances that all add up to make Teams a chore to use. Slack has done a much better job on UX (in my opinion).

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by kyawzazaw on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @07:52PM (#24427358)
How many employees are in your company? Are they all technically inclined? Switching from one to tool to another frequently is quite a drain, imo.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by lawnchair_larry on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:54PM (#24425802)
Sounds like a feature to me. Aside from the poor experience on mobile, I’d be happier still using IRC. But I’m probably not most people.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by ponker on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @10:01PM (#24428161)
It could be a feature. No question that people with Slack likely send more messages per day than people with Teams. That could be a plus or a minus.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by elkos on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @07:03PM (#24426961)
I love using IRC via the Element/matrix solution. It covers my needs and its pretty effective for what I use it for.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by magicalhippo on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @06:56PM (#24426878)
We use it as a business tool. Charm is not a consideration.

Teams works for us. Chat works, charming or not. And say suddenly you need to share your desktop while chatting to show some issue, well no problem. Need to invite a couple of folks from support to get some of their input? No problem, just invite them. Poof you got an ad-hoc meeting going and you get an issue solved in 5-10 minutes and customer is happy.

It's not like I want to marry it, but for the most part it works quite well and doesn't get in my way. And so it's a decent enough tool.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by Wagmire on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @10:15PM (#24428256)
Teams is functional and user friendly. Bosses approve of functionality over ejoyment and admin probably spends less on an extension to microsoft office.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by grovellogic on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:59PM (#24424502)
How much of the office 365 platform is truly needed for work? Developers have been avoiding it for years, it is an old bloated piece of software, that many companies stick with because it is the status quo.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by bsder on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @08:28PM (#24427608)
Companies stick with it because of Exchange. Office 365 means Microsoft gets to manage email problems in return for money.

Everything else comes along for the ride.

We spend probably 20 hours every month on the phone with them managing various issues. My CEO has asked if we could run our own email server and I have refused every single time for the simple reason that we would now spend 40 hours per month on the same email issues since both source and destination of the complaint would be company internal.

AND we would be fighting getting our email delivered because Google and Microsoft basically dump your email in the trash for not coming from Microsoft or Google.

No thanks. Pay Microsoft. They're the least bad in the space.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by addicted on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @03:18PM (#24424743)
Office 365 is completely new and different.

If you’re ok with the apps, then it provides a ton of value for a fraction of the price others do.

I mean, Slack itself is almost as expensive as O365 which offers Office (online and offline) and a ton of other apps and features in addition to Teams.

Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by TheOperator on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:00PM (#24425271)
There are more workers than software developers. Specialised version of Word and Excel are literally provided in the CPA exam. The general concept of having an integrated "suite" of office software compatible with eachother, G-suite or o365, is also very appealing.
Re:Even with 49% up sales and a 46% drop in expenses Slack s... by ksk on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @06:16PM (#24426545)
What is obvious is no single person requires all of it, and everyone uses a different subset of features so its nice to have everything in one package. The integration with their admin cloud service allows easy management of the software in terms of deployment, compliance and everything else. I agree it is bloated and there is significant vendor lock-in from MS, but there is nothing comparable IMHO. I think it would easily cost $100 mil to duplicate all the features.