3 ms·
I closed the page as soon as I read the title. Why anything mildly succesful (or largely, as slack) in this field must be immediately labeled as an email killer
by camillomiller 11y ago
I closed the page as soon as I read the title.
Why anything mildly succesful (or largely, as slack) in this field must be immediately labeled as an email killer?
Why are we trying so hard to kill email!? Nothing like slack, which is extremely useful and productive, can substitute the naturally delayed nature of email. It's freeing, it's free of expectations of a quick answer, but it can be fast and paced nonetheless. Email is still wonderful, and open, and available everywhere. It's the best piece of technology we ever invented in the field of personal communication. And it's damn resilient.
Slack is great and somehow revolutionary. It doesn't need to be downplayed by being defined as the n-th email killer that wasn't.
- lbotos 11y agoIt isn't trying to kill _all_ email, or replace the entirety of what email offers but replace using email as communication intra-office. I still email my friends and use email every day, but slack has reduced my intra-office work email to 3-5 threads a week from a 20-30 before.
- camillomiller 11y agoWhich is correct and it's also why the title and the label - email killer - are dead wrong and anti-factual.
- pierrebai 11y agoThe one killer feature missing from email, and which should be doable with an standard extension, is to retroactively include someone in a conversation, forwarding the messages you have a notifying other participants of the change. I note that newsgroup are somewhat that feature, but they live in a different space than email, with no integration. I really wish companies would develop and push such a standard instead of reinventing 80% of the wheel, tack on their shiny new proprietary hubcap and try to displace email. We have people pushing slack here, and it's annoying to have yet another independant channel. It doesn't properly cross polineate with email.