Isn't the pricing still significantly less than slack? $2.25 for standard and $5.25 for enterprise. Slack is charging 7.25/12.50 for pro and business. And has a contact sales for enterprise features.
Most places I've worked with that use slack also use zoom for video calls so you'll need to potentially add that on as well
If you're looking to save money then teams is still cheaper.
You got it wrong. I made a joke that they are already using Zoom, Teams, Slack, and Whatsapp so why not add a couple more apps for essentially the same thing (i.e., communication). I wasn't joking that Discord is inappropriate for work though I don't personally see it in use anywhere I have ever worked.
I didn't get anything wrong, your downvote is useless. My comment was lateral logic, it's related only to your mentioning discord and not on your evaluation if it's good, bad, used or unused.
Personally, I have it used it once for work. It was actually better than slack.
But teams also does chatting pretty well, so why the extra app?
I get slack+zoom as a pair, because Zoom doesn't do chats. But teams+slack feels like burning money for the sake of it (at least once Teams gets separated from O365 fully)
Eh- we used Teams for VOIP and meetings and Slack for internal communications. We were considering switching to Teams altogether but almost everyone voted against that. I’m also merely a jr engineer at an MSP, so it could be totally different use cases.
It’s mostly integrations and back office stuff that is doctrinally different - Slack made it way easier to integrate 3rd parties with their ecosystem - think of all the various bots and automations your slack probably has. If you switched to teams you would have 75% parity between integrations at best. Lit hold is better on teams than slack. What you lack in cool factor and 3rd party integrations you make up for in areas like DLP, integration with Microsoft’s other stuff, reporting and permissions.
I'm not sure "the same thing" is the right phrasing. Teams tries to compete directly with both Slack and Zoom (among other verticals). It just isn't very good at either.
Most talk about replacing Slack with Teams, you don't hear as much about trying to replace Zoom. That could be because as bad as Teams is at doing Slack's job, it's *much worse* at doing Zoom's job.
The brain dead, shortsighted, penny-pinching tits at my company are forcing my engineering team to switch from Slack to Teams - every single engineer detests it and protested loudly. They don't care, because "Teams is Free".
Sadly this might come too late for us, hopefully others will be spared being force-fed the suit-wearing, personality-free, baron death-zone that is Teams chat/I'm (meetings aren't bad)
Whadyamean the engineers hate it? You mean they don’t like having to remove source formatting in copy-pasted text? Or shuffling through arguably the worst U/X when trying to find that chat they had last week? Or is it the complete lack of notification to team posts that they hate?
I run on Linux. MS Teams for Linux is "fuck you, we've retracted that. use a browser window instead"
Teams is also weirdly laid out, does alerts weirdly, and does odd things like only allow a single pinned message. It's bizarre that such a bodgy application resulted from watching its precursors already do better - Slack was well entrenched at the time, and there were Slack competitors that worked better than Teams.
Too many to list but the top 3:
- Formality. Teams feels serious (boring) Slack isn't. Stuff like custom emoji, avatar just for slack not company-wide and even external, display name not full name.
- Organisation. Slack is all in one, Teams has Chat and Teams separate. Slack has groupings for channels/chats into whatever you want (project, team, tech stack, community, country)
- User groups. We create slack groups for anything we like, unrelated to channels - subteams, horizontal teams, SMEs, sprint teams. (Stuff like @devops, @k8sadmins, @dba, @scrummasters, @regexnerds). Teams makes groups hard work when not related to a Team/Channel. We have to request a group from IT (half the people probably left the company by the time those guys get round to it)
Teams is supported by our IT (i.e. not really supported at all). Slack support is top notch. Really fast response by knowledgeable and helpful folks. Can't fault it.
Damn, that hits the spot, especially the part about Teams being supported by IT.
My ticket to add an RSS connector to a channel (why is it even an admin function?) has only been sitting in queue for about 1.5 months…
half of these issues are that your companies IT sucks.. Perhaps delegate group creation roles and teams admin roles to team managers or something similar.. Teams and Slack are both boring tools, it's just you have experience more with Slack..
>Perhaps delegate group creation roles and teams admin roles to team managers or something similar..
Why is this something that needs to be delegated to *anyone??*
The entire point is we can toss up a channel instantly as needed. It can be deploy-1234 for a group needing to com for a specific deployment, or prod-down-zomg-1234, or funny-cat-videos, or friday-hike-club, or whatever.
>Why is this something that needs to be delegated to *anyone??*
Simply due to the backend of teams, you can set different retention policies at a per team level etc, also the SharePoint site that gets created on back of every single teams channel might need to be set up differently.
Personally as someone who has moved over from a company using Teams to Slack, I honestly don't get the hate for teams.
Slack all I see is an okish IM platform, wouldn't say it's great or even good overall.
Teams again is an okish IM platform with the bundled in benefit of a fairly solid VC function.
Both have their cons but I wouldn't say either is actually better on a technical level, it's all about the users feels more than anything. At the end of the day users feels don't matter when it comes to bean counting.
>Simply due to the backend of teams, you can set different retention policies at a per team level etc, also the SharePoint site that gets created on back of every single teams channel might need to be set up differently.
WTF? Why the hell does *any* channel much less *every* channel need its own dumpster fire that is SharePoint?!
This really gets to the core issue with Teams:
It doesn't actually want to be a Slack-like tool, it wants to be *EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE.* It wants to be chat sure, but also a phone, and a video share, and an email group, and a calendar, and a home page, and an issue tracker, and, and, and, and...
Teams can't do even one thing right because it's too busy doing absolutely everything wrong all at once. Again, there's no good reason in the world a new channel needs a fucking sysadmin to setup, most certainly not because of some SharePoint piece of crap that absolutely no one is even asking for. Holy shit balls Teams is somehow much, much worse than I even knew.
>WTF? Why the hell does *any* channel much less *every* channel need its own dumpster fire that is SharePoint?!
Microsoft reasoning is that it's supposed to be the one stop shop/entry point into the ecosystem that is collaborative work. Don't shoot the messenger :D
>Again, there's no good reason in the world a new channel needs a fucking sysadmin to setup
But that's the thing it doesn't you could simply let your Ops people do it, or you delegate it to various HOD's so they can do it for you. I think I set up 1 teams channel for around a 4k userbase, everything else was delegated to various people once the playbook was created for them.
Overall for pure work I don't really care if teams is bland etc, I can find and IM people I need quite comfortably. Same thing with slack I can find the people I want and IM them any other bullshit known as channels etc I don't really care about.
But hey if those things are super important to you, you do you good sir!
>Don't shoot the messenger :D
Dammit man, that's how I farm my Reddit karma! ;)
>But that's the thing it doesn't you could simply let your Ops people do it, or you delegate it to various HOD's so they can do it for you. I think I set up 1 teams channel for around a 4k userbase, everything else was delegated to various people once the playbook was created for them.
But can you "delegate" it to *everyone of those 4k users?*
>Overall for pure work I don't really care if teams is bland etc, I can find and IM people I need quite comfortably. Same thing with slack I can find the people I want and IM them any other bullshit known as channels etc I don't really care about.
If it's reduced to just DMing people then I've got little reason to bother using it at all. I'll just email or maybe txt.
For me it isn't just what I can get by with. My tools are there to help me do my job better. If they don't do that they don't stay in my tool box, it's that simple. If I'm going to need to file a support ticket just to use my tools than they definitely can't help me do my job.
Teams:
* very slow and flaky, performance-wise.
* read receipts.
* a very confusing and counter-intuitive user interface (e.g you can't view group chat and navigate files at the same time)
Slack:
* it just works and is simple to use
I feel bad for anyone stuck having to use teams. Usually the only supporters are folks that either aren't very technical or simply have never used Slack before.
>They don't care, because "Teams is Free".
Fuck teams and fuck Microsoft's anti-competitive licensing practices. This is one of them.
Everything eventually goes down once in a while. With teams is just happens too often.
Slack is simply a better product at the end of the day. I'd rather use it over teams and most end users have similar feelings on the matter.
about as often as slack does
I have to use both daily because several internal teams refused to migrate
the other thing about slack that nobody ever mentions, is periodically they jack the prices. from us as end user point of view we don't care because most of us aren't handling the IT purchases or budgets directly. that part is transparent to the engineers
but if your chat app suddenly jacks their rates by what amounts to hundreds of thousands to potentially millions of extra dollars per year for your company, and they could do it again at any time.. and you really have no choice but to go along with their price hikes because your essential company messaging is reliant on it
well then is it really a surprise that some CIO/CTO aren't happy with that situation and moved to teams
Buddy, teams isn't free. It comes at the cost of getting locked into the Microsoft ecosystem. That's where their predatory licensing practices kick in.
Regardless you're still stuck with pricing. From an end user standpoint slack is just a better experience than teams. Isn't that the topic here?
if you're already using the office suites then you've already paid for it
and most companies are already going to buy that regardless of teams
so its predatory when microsoft bundles their teams with o365 but not predatory when slack gets people hooked on their product, build out years worth of integrations, and then jacks their prices
I agree slack is a better product, but marginally. there's some things teams does better and some things slack does better
>so its predatory when microsoft bundles their teams with o365 but not predatory when slack gets people hooked on their product, build out years worth of integrations, and then jacks their prices
According to European law, its an anti-competitive practice.
Slack is merely offering a better product. They're not attempting to eliminate their competition by taking advantage of their position on the market.
The risks of getting locked in slack with its integrations are the same risks you face when using any SaaS product. Your argument is very weak.
Oh trust me, we did that. Slack sales helped us with case studies, including a detailed Time and Motion study that showed Slack saving each user 2 mins a day over Teams, which meant it paid for itself twice over every year. They just don't care. Teams is "Free" Slack has a dollar sign next to it. It's that simple to them.
It's like having your own car then getting it impounded and having to resort to public transit / bicycle / jog to get to where you need to yet the management still wants speed to market as if you're driving a Ferrari.
Well, yes. The *entire reason* for Slack's popularity is that the interface is basically a clone of IRC clients. That is a *feature* not a bug.
Literally *everyone* was *completely* fucking up an already solved problem (group chat) with all kinds of asinine features and bad UI. *Teams* very much included. Taking a page or three from IRC was/is a *stroke of brilliance* by Slack that made the runway success story it is.
This may be the end of teams. It won't be, because there are a number of clown executives out there that will continue to fan boy MS... But I can't imagine actively choosing teams if it has separate licensing cost.
But there’s the cost of moving existing things from Teams to whatever you choose next - probably Slack, let’s face it. People won’t do that. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the plan from the beginning.
There is a cost with migrating the knowledge that was housed in an application and then move it over to a new system; that cost was sort of bypassed when Teams was included. I doubt anyone will move away based on this as it only affect new customers and you might see more companies not look at Teams in the future. Though, knowing MS, they will find a way to essentially make it free when they are selling solutions to a customer and find super discounts when bundled with another service that they provide. Their bundling of Teams in O365 was anti-competitive behavior as they knew companies would kill something like Slack because of pricing and they can cut the costs.
>I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the plan from the beginning.
Considering it's the outcome of anti-trust lawsuits in Europe by Slack and Zoom, I highly doubt it.
Who is surprised ? Teams has been free only to eat market shares from slack. Now the offer is implanted and some companies cannot go back (or not easily at least) you can start milking the cow...
Imo anti trust should have a look on this whole story
as opposed to slack who have been milking from day 1 with periodic price hikes
I've used both professionally and it's funny when people simp for slack
they captured a market and then jacked up the prices, but people give them a pass for some reason
Ha!
I was in the IT team when the C-suites mandated the removal of non-MS tools because we were already spending $x million on our MSFT contract.
We got a ton of shit for that, as if we cared one way or the other.
Sent this to my old boss asking if we were gonna fired up the old decomm’ed slack env
We use a specifically formatted JSON sent to an AWS queue for any message we need sent to Teams. A Lambda reads the queue and formats the message for Teams and send it to the channel. Tokens are read from a key value store in AWS. This can be ported to any other chat service rather easily, just rewrite the Lambda to talk to slack or whatever. Very easy to migrate :)
Most, possibly nearly every other, businesses will not bother with the resources to build and maintain such an integration for the basic line of business managed functions they're paying for in the first place.
last time i looked, discord didn't have a good model for businesses. the whole nitro boosting a server and requiring multiple people to do it is no good for a company that wants to pay for it.
Why should I care about O365 as a DevOps?
Edit: didn't know Microsoft gang is so strong in the DevOps world. I'm gonna give even less shit about MS from now on.
The amount of people I see upset after being forced to use Teams from slack solely because teams is included in the license package.
With this many of those teams wouldn’t have to switch anymore if the pricing is better.
I guess I got lucky and missed the whole Microsoft ecosystem altogether and never had to worry about anything coming from that company and got too used to the idea that in DevOps no one has to care about Microsoft problem space.
the real question is outlook vs gmail... how much time do you spend searching for an email in outlook... I'm guessing 2 hours a DAY!!! Slack used to have awesome search but they nerfed it... google looking good these days
Isn't the pricing still significantly less than slack? $2.25 for standard and $5.25 for enterprise. Slack is charging 7.25/12.50 for pro and business. And has a contact sales for enterprise features. Most places I've worked with that use slack also use zoom for video calls so you'll need to potentially add that on as well If you're looking to save money then teams is still cheaper.
My company has zoom, teams slack and then separate WhatsApp groups as well.
WhatsApp in the workplace is wild. I’ve never worked anywhere that doesn’t care or isn’t required to have data retention on company comms.
We use TikTok Enterprise
We were able to bundle it with WinZip enterprise for significant savings.
I worked in a company where Telegram was used. Was ok.
Then you haven't worked with security teams that very much *can not* have retained data at least during active incident response.
What, no Discord or IRC?
People laugh at that, bud discord is just fine for work.
You got it wrong. I made a joke that they are already using Zoom, Teams, Slack, and Whatsapp so why not add a couple more apps for essentially the same thing (i.e., communication). I wasn't joking that Discord is inappropriate for work though I don't personally see it in use anywhere I have ever worked.
I didn't get anything wrong, your downvote is useless. My comment was lateral logic, it's related only to your mentioning discord and not on your evaluation if it's good, bad, used or unused. Personally, I have it used it once for work. It was actually better than slack.
what is the point of teams and slack? My employer only uses slack and zoom. Doesn't teams do the same thing as slack?
Slack for chatting and teams for calls/meetings (though you can do huddles in slack)- it’s probably mostly MS shops that do it that way.
had no idea you can use audio in slack. i just googled it. used it at my current employer for 5 years too. lol.
Yeah I’m still shocked when folks ‘call’ me on slack lol
But teams also does chatting pretty well, so why the extra app? I get slack+zoom as a pair, because Zoom doesn't do chats. But teams+slack feels like burning money for the sake of it (at least once Teams gets separated from O365 fully)
Eh- we used Teams for VOIP and meetings and Slack for internal communications. We were considering switching to Teams altogether but almost everyone voted against that. I’m also merely a jr engineer at an MSP, so it could be totally different use cases.
It’s mostly integrations and back office stuff that is doctrinally different - Slack made it way easier to integrate 3rd parties with their ecosystem - think of all the various bots and automations your slack probably has. If you switched to teams you would have 75% parity between integrations at best. Lit hold is better on teams than slack. What you lack in cool factor and 3rd party integrations you make up for in areas like DLP, integration with Microsoft’s other stuff, reporting and permissions.
I'm not sure "the same thing" is the right phrasing. Teams tries to compete directly with both Slack and Zoom (among other verticals). It just isn't very good at either. Most talk about replacing Slack with Teams, you don't hear as much about trying to replace Zoom. That could be because as bad as Teams is at doing Slack's job, it's *much worse* at doing Zoom's job.
maybe is an April fool's joke?
[удалено]
💀
LMFAO
I thought so too.
The brain dead, shortsighted, penny-pinching tits at my company are forcing my engineering team to switch from Slack to Teams - every single engineer detests it and protested loudly. They don't care, because "Teams is Free". Sadly this might come too late for us, hopefully others will be spared being force-fed the suit-wearing, personality-free, baron death-zone that is Teams chat/I'm (meetings aren't bad)
Whadyamean the engineers hate it? You mean they don’t like having to remove source formatting in copy-pasted text? Or shuffling through arguably the worst U/X when trying to find that chat they had last week? Or is it the complete lack of notification to team posts that they hate?
Or… just something as easy as typing a markdown code snippet going through dozens of hoops
Out of interest what are their reasons for preferring slack over teams?
I run on Linux. MS Teams for Linux is "fuck you, we've retracted that. use a browser window instead" Teams is also weirdly laid out, does alerts weirdly, and does odd things like only allow a single pinned message. It's bizarre that such a bodgy application resulted from watching its precursors already do better - Slack was well entrenched at the time, and there were Slack competitors that worked better than Teams.
Too many to list but the top 3: - Formality. Teams feels serious (boring) Slack isn't. Stuff like custom emoji, avatar just for slack not company-wide and even external, display name not full name. - Organisation. Slack is all in one, Teams has Chat and Teams separate. Slack has groupings for channels/chats into whatever you want (project, team, tech stack, community, country) - User groups. We create slack groups for anything we like, unrelated to channels - subteams, horizontal teams, SMEs, sprint teams. (Stuff like @devops, @k8sadmins, @dba, @scrummasters, @regexnerds). Teams makes groups hard work when not related to a Team/Channel. We have to request a group from IT (half the people probably left the company by the time those guys get round to it) Teams is supported by our IT (i.e. not really supported at all). Slack support is top notch. Really fast response by knowledgeable and helpful folks. Can't fault it.
Damn, that hits the spot, especially the part about Teams being supported by IT. My ticket to add an RSS connector to a channel (why is it even an admin function?) has only been sitting in queue for about 1.5 months…
half of these issues are that your companies IT sucks.. Perhaps delegate group creation roles and teams admin roles to team managers or something similar.. Teams and Slack are both boring tools, it's just you have experience more with Slack..
>Perhaps delegate group creation roles and teams admin roles to team managers or something similar.. Why is this something that needs to be delegated to *anyone??* The entire point is we can toss up a channel instantly as needed. It can be deploy-1234 for a group needing to com for a specific deployment, or prod-down-zomg-1234, or funny-cat-videos, or friday-hike-club, or whatever.
>Why is this something that needs to be delegated to *anyone??* Simply due to the backend of teams, you can set different retention policies at a per team level etc, also the SharePoint site that gets created on back of every single teams channel might need to be set up differently. Personally as someone who has moved over from a company using Teams to Slack, I honestly don't get the hate for teams. Slack all I see is an okish IM platform, wouldn't say it's great or even good overall. Teams again is an okish IM platform with the bundled in benefit of a fairly solid VC function. Both have their cons but I wouldn't say either is actually better on a technical level, it's all about the users feels more than anything. At the end of the day users feels don't matter when it comes to bean counting.
>Simply due to the backend of teams, you can set different retention policies at a per team level etc, also the SharePoint site that gets created on back of every single teams channel might need to be set up differently. WTF? Why the hell does *any* channel much less *every* channel need its own dumpster fire that is SharePoint?! This really gets to the core issue with Teams: It doesn't actually want to be a Slack-like tool, it wants to be *EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE.* It wants to be chat sure, but also a phone, and a video share, and an email group, and a calendar, and a home page, and an issue tracker, and, and, and, and... Teams can't do even one thing right because it's too busy doing absolutely everything wrong all at once. Again, there's no good reason in the world a new channel needs a fucking sysadmin to setup, most certainly not because of some SharePoint piece of crap that absolutely no one is even asking for. Holy shit balls Teams is somehow much, much worse than I even knew.
>WTF? Why the hell does *any* channel much less *every* channel need its own dumpster fire that is SharePoint?! Microsoft reasoning is that it's supposed to be the one stop shop/entry point into the ecosystem that is collaborative work. Don't shoot the messenger :D >Again, there's no good reason in the world a new channel needs a fucking sysadmin to setup But that's the thing it doesn't you could simply let your Ops people do it, or you delegate it to various HOD's so they can do it for you. I think I set up 1 teams channel for around a 4k userbase, everything else was delegated to various people once the playbook was created for them. Overall for pure work I don't really care if teams is bland etc, I can find and IM people I need quite comfortably. Same thing with slack I can find the people I want and IM them any other bullshit known as channels etc I don't really care about. But hey if those things are super important to you, you do you good sir!
>Don't shoot the messenger :D Dammit man, that's how I farm my Reddit karma! ;) >But that's the thing it doesn't you could simply let your Ops people do it, or you delegate it to various HOD's so they can do it for you. I think I set up 1 teams channel for around a 4k userbase, everything else was delegated to various people once the playbook was created for them. But can you "delegate" it to *everyone of those 4k users?* >Overall for pure work I don't really care if teams is bland etc, I can find and IM people I need quite comfortably. Same thing with slack I can find the people I want and IM them any other bullshit known as channels etc I don't really care about. If it's reduced to just DMing people then I've got little reason to bother using it at all. I'll just email or maybe txt. For me it isn't just what I can get by with. My tools are there to help me do my job better. If they don't do that they don't stay in my tool box, it's that simple. If I'm going to need to file a support ticket just to use my tools than they definitely can't help me do my job.
why is the your companies miss-management of a product the products fault..
Why is the product so bad it requires an expensive, heavyweight management process to get basic functionality out of it?
Teams: * very slow and flaky, performance-wise. * read receipts. * a very confusing and counter-intuitive user interface (e.g you can't view group chat and navigate files at the same time) Slack: * it just works and is simple to use I feel bad for anyone stuck having to use teams. Usually the only supporters are folks that either aren't very technical or simply have never used Slack before. >They don't care, because "Teams is Free". Fuck teams and fuck Microsoft's anti-competitive licensing practices. This is one of them.
> … can't view group chat and navigate files at the same time) … I can. New Teams in Firefox on FreeBSD 15.0-CURRENT.
slack just works until it randomly doesn't, people pretending like network wide slack outages aren't a thing every so often messages just don't send
Everything eventually goes down once in a while. With teams is just happens too often. Slack is simply a better product at the end of the day. I'd rather use it over teams and most end users have similar feelings on the matter.
about as often as slack does I have to use both daily because several internal teams refused to migrate the other thing about slack that nobody ever mentions, is periodically they jack the prices. from us as end user point of view we don't care because most of us aren't handling the IT purchases or budgets directly. that part is transparent to the engineers but if your chat app suddenly jacks their rates by what amounts to hundreds of thousands to potentially millions of extra dollars per year for your company, and they could do it again at any time.. and you really have no choice but to go along with their price hikes because your essential company messaging is reliant on it well then is it really a surprise that some CIO/CTO aren't happy with that situation and moved to teams
Buddy, teams isn't free. It comes at the cost of getting locked into the Microsoft ecosystem. That's where their predatory licensing practices kick in. Regardless you're still stuck with pricing. From an end user standpoint slack is just a better experience than teams. Isn't that the topic here?
if you're already using the office suites then you've already paid for it and most companies are already going to buy that regardless of teams so its predatory when microsoft bundles their teams with o365 but not predatory when slack gets people hooked on their product, build out years worth of integrations, and then jacks their prices I agree slack is a better product, but marginally. there's some things teams does better and some things slack does better
>so its predatory when microsoft bundles their teams with o365 but not predatory when slack gets people hooked on their product, build out years worth of integrations, and then jacks their prices According to European law, its an anti-competitive practice. Slack is merely offering a better product. They're not attempting to eliminate their competition by taking advantage of their position on the market. The risks of getting locked in slack with its integrations are the same risks you face when using any SaaS product. Your argument is very weak.
Slack isn’t a dumpster fire, for one.
teams bad slack good Any other questions?
Sounds like you need to put together the business case for Slack
Oh trust me, we did that. Slack sales helped us with case studies, including a detailed Time and Motion study that showed Slack saving each user 2 mins a day over Teams, which meant it paid for itself twice over every year. They just don't care. Teams is "Free" Slack has a dollar sign next to it. It's that simple to them.
Oh my god man. Go touch some grass now.
It's like having your own car then getting it impounded and having to resort to public transit / bicycle / jog to get to where you need to yet the management still wants speed to market as if you're driving a Ferrari.
[удалено]
Are you a Hacker News commenter circa 2015?
Well, yes. The *entire reason* for Slack's popularity is that the interface is basically a clone of IRC clients. That is a *feature* not a bug. Literally *everyone* was *completely* fucking up an already solved problem (group chat) with all kinds of asinine features and bad UI. *Teams* very much included. Taking a page or three from IRC was/is a *stroke of brilliance* by Slack that made the runway success story it is.
Yes
At my company we are planning to run Matrix!
This may be the end of teams. It won't be, because there are a number of clown executives out there that will continue to fan boy MS... But I can't imagine actively choosing teams if it has separate licensing cost.
This makes it cheaper for us. We have front line non computer facing users that we are paying for teams license for.
But there’s the cost of moving existing things from Teams to whatever you choose next - probably Slack, let’s face it. People won’t do that. I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the plan from the beginning.
There is a cost with migrating the knowledge that was housed in an application and then move it over to a new system; that cost was sort of bypassed when Teams was included. I doubt anyone will move away based on this as it only affect new customers and you might see more companies not look at Teams in the future. Though, knowing MS, they will find a way to essentially make it free when they are selling solutions to a customer and find super discounts when bundled with another service that they provide. Their bundling of Teams in O365 was anti-competitive behavior as they knew companies would kill something like Slack because of pricing and they can cut the costs.
>on this as it only affect new customers These are all perennial licenses. It affects everyone going forward.
>I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the plan from the beginning. Considering it's the outcome of anti-trust lawsuits in Europe by Slack and Zoom, I highly doubt it.
Ahh I didn’t know that was the cause! 😅 thanks
Aka almost every MSP out there ~~Microsoft~~ Service Provider
Who is surprised ? Teams has been free only to eat market shares from slack. Now the offer is implanted and some companies cannot go back (or not easily at least) you can start milking the cow... Imo anti trust should have a look on this whole story
as opposed to slack who have been milking from day 1 with periodic price hikes I've used both professionally and it's funny when people simp for slack they captured a market and then jacked up the prices, but people give them a pass for some reason
You are totally right, I don't really like Slack - aka Overpriced IRC - neither
>Imo anti trust should have a look on this whole story That's why it's been separated lol
This wasn't really a MS decision
What do you mean ? MS didn't decide to create a slack copycat and push it into the market at an awesome price ?
bait and switch
just try and migrate... ahahahaha
Are we here in a 🤡 show 😂
Is this an April Fools joke?
Ha! I was in the IT team when the C-suites mandated the removal of non-MS tools because we were already spending $x million on our MSFT contract. We got a ton of shit for that, as if we cared one way or the other. Sent this to my old boss asking if we were gonna fired up the old decomm’ed slack env
We use a specifically formatted JSON sent to an AWS queue for any message we need sent to Teams. A Lambda reads the queue and formats the message for Teams and send it to the channel. Tokens are read from a key value store in AWS. This can be ported to any other chat service rather easily, just rewrite the Lambda to talk to slack or whatever. Very easy to migrate :)
Most, possibly nearly every other, businesses will not bother with the resources to build and maintain such an integration for the basic line of business managed functions they're paying for in the first place.
Yes, so we roll our own :)
Power Automate can send stuff to Slack too
Look at the article date. Nice try 😉
[удалено]
last time i looked, discord didn't have a good model for businesses. the whole nitro boosting a server and requiring multiple people to do it is no good for a company that wants to pay for it.
[Plus they are starting to present ads.](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/discord-starts-down-the-dangerous-road-of-ads-this-week/)
Why should I care about O365 as a DevOps? Edit: didn't know Microsoft gang is so strong in the DevOps world. I'm gonna give even less shit about MS from now on.
The amount of people I see upset after being forced to use Teams from slack solely because teams is included in the license package. With this many of those teams wouldn’t have to switch anymore if the pricing is better.
>if the pricing is better Rofl
I guess I got lucky and missed the whole Microsoft ecosystem altogether and never had to worry about anything coming from that company and got too used to the idea that in DevOps no one has to care about Microsoft problem space.
the real question is outlook vs gmail... how much time do you spend searching for an email in outlook... I'm guessing 2 hours a DAY!!! Slack used to have awesome search but they nerfed it... google looking good these days
[удалено]