5 ms·

Apparently Team usage is up significantly. You can do video conferencing via Team which is one aspect that is quite different from Slack. I imagine there are so

Apparently Team usage is up significantly. You can do video conferencing via Team which is one aspect that is quite different from Slack. I imagine there are some new use cases arising from that.

lewispb 7y ago
Different in what way? Slack has built-in video conferencing?
- wikibob 7y ago
  Slack’s video conferencing sucks. They bought ScreenHero and tried to integrate it. They screwed it up so bad that the ScreenHero founder quit after 4 years and has gone and rewrote it and called it Screen: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22676040 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22676040
  - pwarner 7y ago
    Yeah Slack themselves use Zoom. Slack is a channel based messaging tool, it integrates with best of class video tools like Zoom and file storage tools like Box or even SharePoint. Teams does it all OKish, although the channel based messaging is probably the worst part. It's sort of wrong to look at Teams as a Slack replacement. Well, it is for who just want chat, and don't care about channel messaging.
    - p1necone 7y ago
      Integration seems like the ideal path for Slack. Make it easy and seamless to use any third party service from Slack rather than trying to build functionality directly into it other than the core group/direct chat stuff.
      - dexterdog 7y ago
        How is video conferencing not a core chat thing?
      - toyg 7y ago
        > Integration seems like the ideal path for Slack. It's pretty easy for Teams too. I don't particularly like Teams, nor do I like Slack, but there is nothing feature-wise, today, that would make me choose Slack over Teams. Teams also plays much better with OneDrive and Outlook, obviously. I think Slack is now a goner. They will be acquired in 5 years tops.
        fencepost 7y ago
        Perhaps they can be the Google chat product that survives?
        turbinerneiter 7y ago
        RIP slack, you tried, but 0 chance against MS/win/office monopoly.
- rodgerd 7y ago
  When I raise a meeting in Outlook, I get a Teams videoconf button and attendance etc will all be managed via Exchange on-line. I can record the meeting and have it shared in the channel as part of the process. There are beta features that transcribe the audio to text, as well.
auxym 7y ago
I work for a university, and the official word is to use Teams for everything, including classes transferred online, as the internal infra is not at all able to take the load. Teams has video conferencing, but also hooks into SharePoint for shared documents.
bharam 7y ago
We now use Teams at work for video conferencing all the time. Before the emergency we hardly ever did.
Polylactic_acid 7y ago
We recently dropped slack and moved to teams when we started working from home. It seems to be mostly better than slack.
bane 7y ago
We had started tentatively using teams before all this. Now it's a critical part of our day-to-day functioning and you know what? It's not bad, not bad at all. It's pretty well thought out, reliable, integrated with Outlook and Sharepoint. Even the few people who complained that they wouldn't use it because there wasn't a phone number to call for telecons were overcome when we told them to just install the app and join the conference that way. For internal work, it's actually been a lifesaver. Webex and other solutions have failed to hold up under the strain while Teams has more or less just kept marching on. I have a feeling as this goes on for the next few months Teams users will not go back to the fractured fragile mess of other apps we tried to get along with before hand. Hell, there's even a halfway decent Kanban built in.
- blencdr 7y ago
  Same experience here, my company was unable to choose a collaborative software, but in just one day 250 people had to work remotly while none before. Teams is somewhat good, good tools to create wikis and integrate third party solution like Jira and office integration. One selling point to me is that "it just works" even with non technical users.
- thecatspaw 7y ago
  I still absolutely loathe teams. There is no way to get it to show you have unread messages (the red dot of slack). Notifications do not work reliably. When I am in a Teams channel I miss notifications from the Chat channels, and vice versa. For me Teams has been a major downgrade from Slack
  - AA-BA-94-2A-56 7y ago
    The best was IRC and mumble. It's been downhill since then.
    - xnyan 7y ago
      I like IRC and use it. I have zero understanding why anyone on HN thinks IRC is a viable chat option outside uber-nerds. Show me a training plan (outline is fine), case study or blog or anything outlining how to train my 50 non-technical coworkers in the use of IRC. They need image support and audio chat and all the other modern chat features users demand. Keep in mind there are a lot of chat options and users will walk if what you want to use is rejected by them. IRC is not and has not been a even remotely viable option for anyone but nerds and hobbyists for many years now. i would be very happy to see any evidence to the contrary.

Apparently Team usage is up significantly. You can do video conferencing via Team which is one aspect that is quite different from Slack. I imagine there are some new use cases arising from that.

lewispb 7y ago

Different in what way? Slack has built-in video conferencing?

wikibob 7y ago
Slack’s video conferencing sucks. They bought ScreenHero and tried to integrate it. They screwed it up so bad that the ScreenHero founder quit after 4 years and has gone and rewrote it and called it Screen: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22676040 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22676040
- pwarner 7y ago
  Yeah Slack themselves use Zoom. Slack is a channel based messaging tool, it integrates with best of class video tools like Zoom and file storage tools like Box or even SharePoint. Teams does it all OKish, although the channel based messaging is probably the worst part. It's sort of wrong to look at Teams as a Slack replacement. Well, it is for who just want chat, and don't care about channel messaging.
  - p1necone 7y ago
    Integration seems like the ideal path for Slack. Make it easy and seamless to use any third party service from Slack rather than trying to build functionality directly into it other than the core group/direct chat stuff.
    - dexterdog 7y ago
      How is video conferencing not a core chat thing?
    - toyg 7y ago
      > Integration seems like the ideal path for Slack. It's pretty easy for Teams too. I don't particularly like Teams, nor do I like Slack, but there is nothing feature-wise, today, that would make me choose Slack over Teams. Teams also plays much better with OneDrive and Outlook, obviously. I think Slack is now a goner. They will be acquired in 5 years tops.
      - fencepost 7y ago
        Perhaps they can be the Google chat product that survives?
      - turbinerneiter 7y ago
        RIP slack, you tried, but 0 chance against MS/win/office monopoly.
rodgerd 7y ago
When I raise a meeting in Outlook, I get a Teams videoconf button and attendance etc will all be managed via Exchange on-line. I can record the meeting and have it shared in the channel as part of the process. There are beta features that transcribe the audio to text, as well.

auxym 7y ago

I work for a university, and the official word is to use Teams for everything, including classes transferred online, as the internal infra is not at all able to take the load. Teams has video conferencing, but also hooks into SharePoint for shared documents.

bharam 7y ago

We now use Teams at work for video conferencing all the time. Before the emergency we hardly ever did.

Polylactic_acid 7y ago

We recently dropped slack and moved to teams when we started working from home. It seems to be mostly better than slack.

bane 7y ago

We had started tentatively using teams before all this. Now it's a critical part of our day-to-day functioning and you know what? It's not bad, not bad at all. It's pretty well thought out, reliable, integrated with Outlook and Sharepoint. Even the few people who complained that they wouldn't use it because there wasn't a phone number to call for telecons were overcome when we told them to just install the app and join the conference that way. For internal work, it's actually been a lifesaver. Webex and other solutions have failed to hold up under the strain while Teams has more or less just kept marching on. I have a feeling as this goes on for the next few months Teams users will not go back to the fractured fragile mess of other apps we tried to get along with before hand. Hell, there's even a halfway decent Kanban built in.

blencdr 7y ago
Same experience here, my company was unable to choose a collaborative software, but in just one day 250 people had to work remotly while none before. Teams is somewhat good, good tools to create wikis and integrate third party solution like Jira and office integration. One selling point to me is that "it just works" even with non technical users.
thecatspaw 7y ago
I still absolutely loathe teams. There is no way to get it to show you have unread messages (the red dot of slack). Notifications do not work reliably. When I am in a Teams channel I miss notifications from the Chat channels, and vice versa. For me Teams has been a major downgrade from Slack
- AA-BA-94-2A-56 7y ago
  The best was IRC and mumble. It's been downhill since then.
  - xnyan 7y ago
    I like IRC and use it. I have zero understanding why anyone on HN thinks IRC is a viable chat option outside uber-nerds. Show me a training plan (outline is fine), case study or blog or anything outlining how to train my 50 non-technical coworkers in the use of IRC. They need image support and audio chat and all the other modern chat features users demand. Keep in mind there are a lot of chat options and users will walk if what you want to use is rejected by them. IRC is not and has not been a even remotely viable option for anyone but nerds and hobbyists for many years now. i would be very happy to see any evidence to the contrary.