4 ms·

I find it funny how some companies first refused to adopt slack due to lack on onsite storage, later adopted teams with no such reservations

TheOperator 6y ago
Microsoft is much more capable of meeting any compliance demands around cloud data storage than a company like Slack is. Microsoft builds clouds for militaries.
gumby 6y ago
Because Microsoft promised to eliminate the perceived risks of remote storage while slack couldn’t make that promise (if they even tried) to the kids of people who care. Slack was more focused on the end user while Microsoft focuses on the customer (which for most of their cash cows, Windows and Office) is IT. Presumabably you think this concern is somewhere between overblown and absurd. I do. But if you’re State Farm* you have to either find a solution or get air cover for your decision by offloading it on your long term, trusted vendor. (This is basically half of the thesis of the article). The need to have a story for all these special cases is why Microsoft’s messaging is so confusing and their products frequently (but not always) unwieldy. But it lets them hoover up the cash for all those special cases...and since others can’t afford to deal with every one, they can charge more.
- AzzieElbab 6y ago
  But I have seen no evidence of such promises by ms. Everything seem to be build on assumptions
  - gumby 6y ago
    That was my point in saying, “[buyer at big enterprises must] either find a solution or get air cover for your decision by offloading it on your long term, trusted vendor.” In other words: “We need offline storage in case something goes wrong. But nobody offers it. Well I’ll stick with ms because at least if someone complains I can point to the company we’ve always chosen” This is why Oracle still does so well. Don’t get me wrong: they have some high end features few others offer. But many people could do fine with something simpler, but why take a chance? When the trade off is “get something better for the company” versus “risk losing my job” which are you going to choose?

TheOperator 6y ago

Microsoft is much more capable of meeting any compliance demands around cloud data storage than a company like Slack is. Microsoft builds clouds for militaries.

gumby 6y ago

Because Microsoft promised to eliminate the perceived risks of remote storage while slack couldn’t make that promise (if they even tried) to the kids of people who care. Slack was more focused on the end user while Microsoft focuses on the customer (which for most of their cash cows, Windows and Office) is IT. Presumabably you think this concern is somewhere between overblown and absurd. I do. But if you’re State Farm* you have to either find a solution or get air cover for your decision by offloading it on your long term, trusted vendor. (This is basically half of the thesis of the article). The need to have a story for all these special cases is why Microsoft’s messaging is so confusing and their products frequently (but not always) unwieldy. But it lets them hoover up the cash for all those special cases...and since others can’t afford to deal with every one, they can charge more.

AzzieElbab 6y ago
But I have seen no evidence of such promises by ms. Everything seem to be build on assumptions
- gumby 6y ago
  That was my point in saying, “[buyer at big enterprises must] either find a solution or get air cover for your decision by offloading it on your long term, trusted vendor.” In other words: “We need offline storage in case something goes wrong. But nobody offers it. Well I’ll stick with ms because at least if someone complains I can point to the company we’ve always chosen” This is why Oracle still does so well. Don’t get me wrong: they have some high end features few others offer. But many people could do fine with something simpler, but why take a chance? When the trade off is “get something better for the company” versus “risk losing my job” which are you going to choose?