News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by misiek08 on Thursday September 18, 2025 @06:49AM (#45288056)
Please do not include PDF and usable in one sentence. Setting up some simple Postgres with sonic for fuzzy search would be _usable_, but PDF is like migrating from Slack to Teams.
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by boringg on Thursday September 18, 2025 @09:08AM (#45289199)
PDF is the worse, it has its use-cases but is so painful to use programatically.
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by HumanOstrich on Thursday September 18, 2025 @02:05PM (#45292913)
I agree, but I don't think they were using the PDFs programmatically.
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by nickjj on Thursday September 18, 2025 @09:24AM (#45289403)
In this case we didn't need a long term solution for searchable data on Slack.

We did the migration in stages, basically this:

    - Provide access to Teams
    - Create all of the new teams / channels there
    - Make Slack read-only but still keep the lights on
    - Allow folks to search and reference historic data as needed with Slack
    - Ensure everyone was moved over to Teams and felt ok enough using it
    - Remove access to Slack
    - Perform Slack export / PDF creation of important channels
    - Attach Slack PDFs to important Teams channels
    - Cancel Slack subscription
In the end, most people never even needed to use the PDFs because they got everything they needed out of Slack before access was removed, but they are there for peace of mind and a last resort.

We also took this as an opportunity to stop using chat as a source of truth for long lived information. Anything that should be stored long term made its way somewhere else (Jira, Confluence, etc.).

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by freehorse on Thursday September 18, 2025 @11:23AM (#45290801)
> In the end, most people never even needed to use the PDFs

Or, they could not in some practical manner do searches on previous posts, so they didn’t use them?

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by PunchTornado on Thursday September 18, 2025 @11:27AM (#45290859)
Wait. You moved from slack to teams? Why? We are in the process of moving to slack from teams and I can’t phantom something worse than teams.
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by nickjj on Thursday September 18, 2025 @11:44AM (#45291074)
I didn't make the decision, the company I worked for did. I was asked to come up with a way to help make the process smooth.

I don't know their exact reasons, probably budget related since they were already using O365.

I can nearly guarantee it wasn't because Teams offers a better user experience. :D

Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by nrclark on Thursday September 18, 2025 @01:58PM (#45292831)
As a product, I like Slack a lot more than teams. Chatting is easier, the apps are better, reminders and scheduled messages, workflows, etc. Threaded conversations are much easier as well, and aren't artificially restricted to certain types of channels.

At a high level though, Salesforce is often seen as a predatory company. Prices are high and they will squeeze their users for every nickel (as demonstrated here). They will also monetize your data in ways that you probably don't want.

Teams chat is pretty bad, I agree. But it does have these benefits:

  - Free if you're already in the Microsoft ecosystem, which most companies are.
  - Microsoft is probably a better steward of your data.
  - Teams video / audio calls are much much better than Slack huddles.
  - That's pretty much it tbh
Re:Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year by oeitho on Thursday September 18, 2025 @04:39PM (#45294741)
> Free if you're already in the Microsoft ecosystem, which most companies are.

Not for long, at least for the EU and I assume for us in the EEA. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...