5 ms·

I’ve contracted at a couple of large orgs. Previously when I’ve been at them they where on Slack, more recently they use Teams. People complain about using Te

I’ve contracted at a couple of large orgs. Previously when I’ve been at them they where on Slack, more recently they use Teams. People complain about using Teams compared to Slack but Teams seems good enough for the people paying for Slack to decide to stop using it. Teams being bundled with Office 365 is a huge value proposition. It’s not a case of who’s best, Slack seems more useful but can never compete with free which Teams is if you already have Office 365 which most large orgs do. Teams video chat is way better than Slack also which may of helped this past year with working from home.

cagey 6y ago
Agree. At my employer the largest engineering BU has been a zealous user of Slack for many years. Problem is, Slack seat licenses aren't free (and are thus rationed) and TPBT are balking at adding any more Slack seats now that corp IT is aggressively pushing Teams which is apparently free (since the overall corp has grown a dependence on some mishmash of O365). The Slack zealots thus appear to be fighting a (losing) rearguard battle against being forced onto Teams.
robjan 6y ago
Teams tends to be used by bigcorps with tens of thousands of hundreds of thousands of staff. Why buy and audit another tool when you already have a Office 365 subscription for the Org.
- laichzeit0 6y ago
  Not even just big orgs. I’m at a small org, our infra is all cloud, office 365 and we use use Teams because why pay money for Slack if Teams is free?
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    If Slack is better than Teams and boosts productivity enough to be worth the cost, why wouldn't you pay money for it? I'm not saying this is the case, but just because Teams is free doesn't mean people won't pay for a better alternative. Clearly there are examples of free office software suites that nobody uses because Office365 is so much better that it's worth the cost.
    - otabdeveloper4 6y ago
      Slack just isn't good enough. It's better than Teams, somewhat, but that's about it. (Despite having both Teams and Slack the people at my workplace keep spontaneously switching to Telegram because it's cross-platform and very fast, despite being the worse chat app on every feature metric. Yes, it turns out performance and portability is a huge value proposition for endusers if you actually give them the choice.)
    - AznHisoka 6y ago
      Because it’s not measurable and it’s hard to argue with your CIO that using Slack will save you $xxx000 in productivity costs. It also doesn’t register a “hair on fire” problem. Slack still has the preconceived notion of being a chat app. And those are not worth the huge investment, compared to problems that truly keep you awake at night ie. Cybersecurity
      - laichzeit0 6y ago
        Bingo. Teams is “good enough” that any marginal advantage of Slack is outweighed by Teams not costing a cent.

cagey 6y ago

Agree. At my employer the largest engineering BU has been a zealous user of Slack for many years. Problem is, Slack seat licenses aren't free (and are thus rationed) and TPBT are balking at adding any more Slack seats now that corp IT is aggressively pushing Teams which is apparently free (since the overall corp has grown a dependence on some mishmash of O365). The Slack zealots thus appear to be fighting a (losing) rearguard battle against being forced onto Teams.

robjan 6y ago

Teams tends to be used by bigcorps with tens of thousands of hundreds of thousands of staff. Why buy and audit another tool when you already have a Office 365 subscription for the Org.

laichzeit0 6y ago
Not even just big orgs. I’m at a small org, our infra is all cloud, office 365 and we use use Teams because why pay money for Slack if Teams is free?
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  If Slack is better than Teams and boosts productivity enough to be worth the cost, why wouldn't you pay money for it? I'm not saying this is the case, but just because Teams is free doesn't mean people won't pay for a better alternative. Clearly there are examples of free office software suites that nobody uses because Office365 is so much better that it's worth the cost.
  - otabdeveloper4 6y ago
    Slack just isn't good enough. It's better than Teams, somewhat, but that's about it. (Despite having both Teams and Slack the people at my workplace keep spontaneously switching to Telegram because it's cross-platform and very fast, despite being the worse chat app on every feature metric. Yes, it turns out performance and portability is a huge value proposition for endusers if you actually give them the choice.)
  - AznHisoka 6y ago
    Because it’s not measurable and it’s hard to argue with your CIO that using Slack will save you $xxx000 in productivity costs. It also doesn’t register a “hair on fire” problem. Slack still has the preconceived notion of being a chat app. And those are not worth the huge investment, compared to problems that truly keep you awake at night ie. Cybersecurity
    - laichzeit0 6y ago
      Bingo. Teams is “good enough” that any marginal advantage of Slack is outweighed by Teams not costing a cent.