4 ms·
Two years ago a company we were at had Slack and it was used vigorously. They hit a user limit and couldn't get the CEO to pony up whatever it cost to extend Sl
by jvagner 7y ago
Two years ago a company we were at had Slack and it was used vigorously. They hit a user limit and couldn't get the CEO to pony up whatever it cost to extend Slack. (This company was the kind of company that had unlimited budgets for conferences and sales calls, but could hardly ever get a CC# for a dev team need...)
They switched to MS Teams, but at least two years ago, it felt unusable. Or, the team's Slackness couldn't translate. No one used it.
Neither Slack nor MS made money in this exchange.
Maybe Teams has gotten better and more usable, but I wonder if Teams is taking off in business environments, whereas Slack definitely is more common in tech environments?
- freewilly1040 7y agoYour example demonstrates my point. Your CEO made a terrible decision in making you switch. Your co spent much more paying people to migrate to something worse than it would have spent just ponying up for the license.
- jvagner 7y agoAgreed. But if Teams comes with Office365, Slack may have trouble getting CEOs to pay more per-user monthly fees. And I pay for both Office365 and G Suite at my business, and Google just invited me to Currents. I know better than to dump something like Slack for any new (like, first 3 years) Google product, but... Slack's getting some real competition.
- ilikehurdles 7y agoThis is the first I heard of Currents, but Google naming their Yammer-clone replacement for G+ after an already-failed Google product is really setting themselves up for success.
- freewilly1040 7y agoThat’s fair and I agree that’s their biggest competitive threat. But investment wise that downside is mitigated by the possibility of being acquired
- cco 7y agoAnecdotally did your team's productivity or quality of work suffer to a large extent after moving to Teams?