4 ms·

Because it doesn't need to improve. It just needs to check some checkboxes. It's "free" as part of Microsoft Office 365. It allows the IT department to check a

Because it doesn't need to improve. It just needs to check some checkboxes. It's "free" as part of Microsoft Office 365. It allows the IT department to check a checkbox and de-incentivize them from looking at Slack. With Slack you have to pay for and is yet another app to administer. Many IT departments who are already Microsoft customers will have an easier time rolling that out than a new app. No new purchase order nor legal review. Microsoft just needs to suck the air out of Slack to "win". Any additional investment by Microsoft is wasted.

colinmhayes 4y ago
Right, every Fortune 500 company already has a msft office contract. Getting everyone on teams is as easy as an IT guy clicking a box and everyone has it on their computer. Doesn’t have to be a great product when it’s that easy to start using. Really Microsoft’s entire company revolves around this “lock them in and utilize our relationship to grow new products” strategy.
- ghiculescu 4y ago
  Hmm, but many of those companies probably have a Salesforce contract too. What do you think will happen if/when SF bundles Slack?
  - fomine3 4y ago
    I think Salesforce isn't used/needed so much like MS Office. MS Office is needed for interoperability but Salesforce is for internal.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      SF is also thousands of dollars a license, office365 is maybe a hundred. So everyone gets o365 but only people who need access have SF.
mBVth4DiupvBPY4 4y ago
It's actually not free as part of all Office 365 plans, sadly. We discovered recently that we'd either have to downgrade(!!!) to the version with only web apps, or upgrade to the version with Exchange, to get teams. (Or, better yet, pay for a Teams-specific license since it's $0.25 cheaper than getting Exchange...) Of course, the whole reason that we were looking at it is that one vendor who says they prefer Teams for some reason, even though we already pay for both Google Meet and Zoom.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Teams is decent as a chat client. Zoom is more of a meeting client (it has chat feature but I’ve never met anyone who uses them).
  - nikau 4y ago
    Its not decent, its usable. Decent would be able to switch chat tabs in under a second, reliable quoting (one minute ``` works, next minute it doesn't), an unread messages view like slack, and overall not being a laggy piece of crap. It gets the job done, but its not decent.
    - Thlom 4y ago
      And the splitting of Teams/chat is really confusing. At least in my org the teams feature is rarely used, but we have chat groups for everything. Other than that agree that it’s too slow to load chats, unread notifications doesn’t go away reliably, search sucks etc.
      - sumedh 4y ago
        For some reason you cannot create threads in chat groups but you can in Teams feature.
- ClassyJacket 4y ago
  Yep, wasted some time on this at work recently too - 365 Apps for Business doesn't include Teams, strangely, despite that the cheaper 'Microsoft 365 Business Basic' does. https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/microsoft-365/business/compare-all-microsoft-365-business-products https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/microsoft-365/business/compa...
redbell 4y ago
That's why, I believe, Slack had filed an antitrust claim against Microsoft [1] claiming that Teams has an unfair advantage by being bundled in the O365 package which make the chance to pick Slack over Teams for companies already purchased O365 near to zero. The claim is two years old now and I haven't heard any news regarding the matter and whether Slack proceeded to the end like Epic Vs. Apple or not [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53503710 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53503710

colinmhayes 4y ago

Right, every Fortune 500 company already has a msft office contract. Getting everyone on teams is as easy as an IT guy clicking a box and everyone has it on their computer. Doesn’t have to be a great product when it’s that easy to start using. Really Microsoft’s entire company revolves around this “lock them in and utilize our relationship to grow new products” strategy.

ghiculescu 4y ago
Hmm, but many of those companies probably have a Salesforce contract too. What do you think will happen if/when SF bundles Slack?
- fomine3 4y ago
  I think Salesforce isn't used/needed so much like MS Office. MS Office is needed for interoperability but Salesforce is for internal.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    SF is also thousands of dollars a license, office365 is maybe a hundred. So everyone gets o365 but only people who need access have SF.

mBVth4DiupvBPY4 4y ago

It's actually not free as part of all Office 365 plans, sadly. We discovered recently that we'd either have to downgrade(!!!) to the version with only web apps, or upgrade to the version with Exchange, to get teams. (Or, better yet, pay for a Teams-specific license since it's $0.25 cheaper than getting Exchange...) Of course, the whole reason that we were looking at it is that one vendor who says they prefer Teams for some reason, even though we already pay for both Google Meet and Zoom.

bombcar 4y ago
Teams is decent as a chat client. Zoom is more of a meeting client (it has chat feature but I’ve never met anyone who uses them).
- nikau 4y ago
  Its not decent, its usable. Decent would be able to switch chat tabs in under a second, reliable quoting (one minute ``` works, next minute it doesn't), an unread messages view like slack, and overall not being a laggy piece of crap. It gets the job done, but its not decent.
  - Thlom 4y ago
    And the splitting of Teams/chat is really confusing. At least in my org the teams feature is rarely used, but we have chat groups for everything. Other than that agree that it’s too slow to load chats, unread notifications doesn’t go away reliably, search sucks etc.
    - sumedh 4y ago
      For some reason you cannot create threads in chat groups but you can in Teams feature.
ClassyJacket 4y ago
Yep, wasted some time on this at work recently too - 365 Apps for Business doesn't include Teams, strangely, despite that the cheaper 'Microsoft 365 Business Basic' does. https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/microsoft-365/business/compare-all-microsoft-365-business-products https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/microsoft-365/business/compa...

redbell 4y ago

That's why, I believe, Slack had filed an antitrust claim against Microsoft [1] claiming that Teams has an unfair advantage by being bundled in the O365 package which make the chance to pick Slack over Teams for companies already purchased O365 near to zero. The claim is two years old now and I haven't heard any news regarding the matter and whether Slack proceeded to the end like Epic Vs. Apple or not [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53503710 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53503710