5 ms·

Agreed. I think in 2016 Slack just got absorbed in their own thing. Slack is pretty good and has some nice features but not really anything a big Acme corp can'

Agreed. I think in 2016 Slack just got absorbed in their own thing. Slack is pretty good and has some nice features but not really anything a big Acme corp can't copy. And I'd expect Slack to be another case where 90% of people just use direct & channel messaging, no or few apps, etc. which means the switching costs are very low. Although on another side, MS Teams is still miles behind Slack. While you can be signed into multiple orgs in Teams, switching orgs literally restarts the program which means that switching from your org to a client's org is super disruptive. If you are in a video call your only option is to open teams in the browser to view another organization.

mgkimsal 6y ago
Yet the mobile app version seems to allow team switching pretty easily. So disappointing, as I've had multiple clients switch to teams over the last year. It was easier to keep multiple slack channels open and jump between as needed to keep an eye on things. Teams is really only focused on 'internal teams at one company' - users external to a company are, at best, an afterthought.
adwww 6y ago
Slack is still just about a better standalone product, but the Teams integration (and bundling) with 365 makes it a very strong product overall.
- MangoCoffee 6y ago
  its free with 365 subscription. our VP of IT love it. its good enough why pay for another similar product (Slack)
  - arkitaip 6y ago
    A 365 sub probably is the single most useful and valuable service most companies can get. I mean, just look at what you get for $15 per user [0]. [0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business/compare-all-microsoft-365-business-products https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business/compa...
kemiller2002 6y ago
I would agree with the low barrier to switch. At my last company, we switched 3 times within a year. Away from Slack, then to Stride, and back to Slack (due to stride being discontinued). The point being that it wasn't too difficult to switch. We didn't suffer from "lock-in" or anything.
ethbr0 6y ago
> multiple orgs in Teams Microsoft's IAM features have always suffered from design by committee. See: Team Foundation Server, SharePoint. The only explanation I've been able to come up with for how such a technically competent company can repeatedly generate such UX incompetent output is that they source all their IAM features from talking to (1) PMs & (2) HR.

mgkimsal 6y ago

Yet the mobile app version seems to allow team switching pretty easily. So disappointing, as I've had multiple clients switch to teams over the last year. It was easier to keep multiple slack channels open and jump between as needed to keep an eye on things. Teams is really only focused on 'internal teams at one company' - users external to a company are, at best, an afterthought.

adwww 6y ago

Slack is still just about a better standalone product, but the Teams integration (and bundling) with 365 makes it a very strong product overall.

MangoCoffee 6y ago
its free with 365 subscription. our VP of IT love it. its good enough why pay for another similar product (Slack)
- arkitaip 6y ago
  A 365 sub probably is the single most useful and valuable service most companies can get. I mean, just look at what you get for $15 per user [0]. [0] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business/compare-all-microsoft-365-business-products https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/business/compa...

kemiller2002 6y ago

I would agree with the low barrier to switch. At my last company, we switched 3 times within a year. Away from Slack, then to Stride, and back to Slack (due to stride being discontinued). The point being that it wasn't too difficult to switch. We didn't suffer from "lock-in" or anything.

ethbr0 6y ago

> multiple orgs in Teams Microsoft's IAM features have always suffered from design by committee. See: Team Foundation Server, SharePoint. The only explanation I've been able to come up with for how such a technically competent company can repeatedly generate such UX incompetent output is that they source all their IAM features from talking to (1) PMs & (2) HR.