3 ms·
>Simply integrating with 365 isn’t enough to justify its use for anyone who knows any better. But compliance may be. For example, Slack charges a lot of money
by marcinzm 8y ago
>Simply integrating with 365 isn’t enough to justify its use for anyone who knows any better.
But compliance may be. For example, Slack charges a lot of money and requires a lot of users for actual HIPAA compliance (as in signing a BAA, everything else is marketing fluff). Teams, from what I can tell, comes with a BAA out of the box.
- chrismeller 8y agoSlack charges what, $12/user/month for the full version with compliance and auditing included? Yeah, that's $12 more than you were spending, but companies that care about compliance really shouldn't be that cash-focused (I know, I know). It's hard to deny Teams when it's already bundled with 365 that we're spending $25/user/month on, but if anyone has ever used both it becomes _immediately_ obvious that it's worth the money. That's the whole approach MS is going for, and something that's very very hard for Slack to combat.
- laurentb 8y agoto be clear, Teams comes with one of the lowest O365 packages at a meagre $5/user/month (if i'm not mistaken on the price)... that's a big difference against Slack.
- marcinzm 8y ago>Slack charges what, $12/user/month for the full version with compliance and auditing included? The $12/user version does NOT include a signed BAA which means it is not HIPAA compliant for all intents and purposes. Like I said, anything without a BAA that says it's HIPAA is useless marketing fluff designed to confuse people. Only the Enterprise Grid product is eligible for a BAA and I believe even then there's some large minimum contract fee.