4 ms·

I'm no Microsoft fan, but this press release is a bit embarassing. For most business use cases Slack is more expensive, and less featured than Microsoft 365, an

I'm no Microsoft fan, but this press release is a bit embarassing. For most business use cases Slack is more expensive, and less featured than Microsoft 365, and it's having to work very hard to justify its existence. Slack could be accused of creating a "weak, copycat product" in their file hosting, document editing, video calling and workflow automation features. I think this is a long continuation of the awkward brand strategy Slack has had for some time. "...an open platform is essential" [1] just doesn't ring true from a closed source SaaS, but it's a good marketing message - so vague that you can't really disagree. And weirdly it's gone from being a poorly conceived guerilla marketing strategy (almost complete with bespoke emoji [2]) to a legal case. It maybe explains how Slack has been racing to embrace Microsoft recently - in a bid to show how "open" they are, and therefore how much they have been damaged by "closed" Microsoft? But wouldn't that swing both ways - if they integrate so easily, then where is the monopoly? Nov 2016 - Slack declares how thoughtful, craftmanship-y, open, loving, long term-y and un-Microsoft-y they are [1] Jan 2018 - Teams launches app store Aug 2018 - Teams offers free tier to compete with Slack [3] Mar 2020 - Slack starts integrating Teams calls [4] Apr 2020 - Slack launches Outlook and One Drive apps [5] [1] https://slackhq.com/dear-microsoft https://slackhq.com/dear-microsoft [2] https://twitter.com/stewart/status/793870058955104257 https://twitter.com/stewart/status/793870058955104257 [3] https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/12/17563710/microsoft-teams-free-version-slack-competitor https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/12/17563710/microsoft-teams-... [4] https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/27/21197091/slack-microsoft-teams-integration-calling-features https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/27/21197091/slack-microsoft-... [5] https://slackhq.com/increase-everyday-productivity-with-office-365-apps-for-slack https://slackhq.com/increase-everyday-productivity-with-offi...

pwinnski 6y ago
> For most business use cases Slack is more expensive, and less featured than Microsoft 365, and it's having to work very hard to justify its existence. I think that's exactly the complaint: that Microsoft is hiding the true cost of Teams, using anti-competitive "bundling" to make Slack seem more expensive by comparison. Not saying I agree, but that does seem to be exactly the complaint.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  Giving a discount by bundling products together is anti-competitive behavior? I don't really follow this reasoning. Bundling services together like that is extremely common in all sorts of industries.
  - pwinnski 6y ago
    Yes, but bundling is also extremely common in anti-trust cases[0]. The goal of bundling is usually to introduce people who like one of your products to your other presumably-equally-good products, especially if they integrate well. Right? Sounds good! If you're incredibly successful at that, and the most popular of your products is market-dominating, then that may be leveraging your market position to squeeze out competitors. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(antitrust_law) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(antitrust_law)
    - tweetle_beetle 6y ago
      Fair enough. But this isn't exactly humble chat app David versus ubiquitous groupware Goliath. Slack is growing fast, has had very large investment and is also trying to dominate this space by bundling as much as it can too. Their aspiration seems to want to be on the other side of this lawsuit in future. (Incidentally it feels like that's where every business productivity tool ends up going: my file sharing service lets me edit documents, my project management tool lets me send emails, my email client lets me chat, my CRM lets me log tickets, my code repository service lets me host websites etc.)

pwinnski 6y ago

> For most business use cases Slack is more expensive, and less featured than Microsoft 365, and it's having to work very hard to justify its existence. I think that's exactly the complaint: that Microsoft is hiding the true cost of Teams, using anti-competitive "bundling" to make Slack seem more expensive by comparison. Not saying I agree, but that does seem to be exactly the complaint.

TulliusCicero 6y ago
Giving a discount by bundling products together is anti-competitive behavior? I don't really follow this reasoning. Bundling services together like that is extremely common in all sorts of industries.
- pwinnski 6y ago
  Yes, but bundling is also extremely common in anti-trust cases[0]. The goal of bundling is usually to introduce people who like one of your products to your other presumably-equally-good products, especially if they integrate well. Right? Sounds good! If you're incredibly successful at that, and the most popular of your products is market-dominating, then that may be leveraging your market position to squeeze out competitors. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(antitrust_law) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_(antitrust_law)
  - tweetle_beetle 6y ago
    Fair enough. But this isn't exactly humble chat app David versus ubiquitous groupware Goliath. Slack is growing fast, has had very large investment and is also trying to dominate this space by bundling as much as it can too. Their aspiration seems to want to be on the other side of this lawsuit in future. (Incidentally it feels like that's where every business productivity tool ends up going: my file sharing service lets me edit documents, my project management tool lets me send emails, my email client lets me chat, my CRM lets me log tickets, my code repository service lets me host websites etc.)