5 ms·

Looks like I won't be using either of these products. Think of all that could have been accomplished on the product had they not been squabbling and setting up

by bjtitus 15y ago

Looks like I won't be using either of these products. Think of all that could have been accomplished on the product had they not been squabbling and setting up websites to argue with one another. No one comes out on top in situations like this. I think it's best to end it with something like: "I'm sorry you feel that way. We'll let the customers decide."

maxwin 15y ago
I think Freshdesk might come out on top on this. I know Zendesk but I've never heard of Freshdesk. Now I know them because of this drama. It's on HN front page and some HN readers might become potential customers. It's free media coverage for Freshdesk. (Zendesk doesn't need this because most already know who they are). I think it was a bad move by Zendesk.
maushu 15y ago
Actually, this should increase the number of trials and customers for Freshdesk. It's like playing chess. Zendesk made a bad move and Freshdesk used that move to respond brilliantly.
- yangez 15y ago
  Nah, this is like playing chess on the wrong board. It's a waste of time and no one gets anything worthwhile accomplished.
  - a5seo 15y ago
    Seriously? Creating that page just got Freshdesk on the HN homepage and hurt Zendesk's reputation very badly. That's a twofer in my book. The fact that Zendesk is using "analyst" payola smacks of the worst practices of four quadrant research firms and enterprise software. "Want to the upper-right quadrant? Sure thing, the price will be..." So at least in this case, it was exposed and we can properly adjust the value of all involved's reputations.
  - benatkin 15y ago
    It's a bad move for FreshDesk's company culture. It's a worse move for ZenDesk but a bad move for FreshDesk. They took this and made it a part of their company by registering a domain name and making a big, glittery page about it. Also, since ZenDesk isn't exactly a behemoth, and it names names, it's quite personal.
- bjtitus 15y ago
  I'm sure it will. It doesn't change my perception of them. In my opinion, anyone who thinks taking the time to create a web page for an argument or who thinks a product in the same field with a similar name is a copycat doesn't care about me, the customer. They should be spending their time improving the product, coming up with new ideas, or responding to legitimate support inquiries. Neither of these companies showed any "brilliant" response. Both end up looking bad.
  - tdfx 15y ago
    If we had to pick a loser here, I'd still go with Zendesk.
  - melvinram 15y ago
    You realize that it probably took FreshDesk maybe 2 hrs to create that page with the intention of defending the credibility of their reputation? And at the same time, by picking (or rather extending) a fight with the industry leader, they are gaining lots of visibility for their product. Was it worth it for FreshDesk to put in the 2 hours to defend their reputation? Of course. How is that not brilliant?
    - bjtitus 15y ago
      Sure. You can argue the publicity was worth something but I am certainly turned off by the way they went about it. They could have mockingly made a fo-ZenDesk logo or any number of other things that didn't make it look like they are on the defensive. Either way, as a customer I am more concerned about either of these companies using ANY of their time on this. Regardless of how much time they spent, it reflects on where their priorities lie.
    - drumdance 15y ago
      I agree. Guy Kawasaki suggests companies should pick fights with better known rivals. Apple vs. IBM back in the day is a perfect example. I now know who Freshdesk is (didn't before) and might consider them in the future. We used to use Zendesk but found it too expensive for our needs. Plug: we use Tender.
  - 15y ago
yummies 15y ago
it's just another form of marketing. spending resources on marketing is a valid approach when you need to stand out from your competitors. with this new campaign, they're likely to get an infusion of customers and cash, which will in turn be more beneficial to their product than the 30 minutes it must have taken them to set up the mud slinging website.

by bjtitus 15y ago

maxwin 15y ago

I think Freshdesk might come out on top on this. I know Zendesk but I've never heard of Freshdesk. Now I know them because of this drama. It's on HN front page and some HN readers might become potential customers. It's free media coverage for Freshdesk. (Zendesk doesn't need this because most already know who they are). I think it was a bad move by Zendesk.

maushu 15y ago

Actually, this should increase the number of trials and customers for Freshdesk. It's like playing chess. Zendesk made a bad move and Freshdesk used that move to respond brilliantly.

yangez 15y ago
Nah, this is like playing chess on the wrong board. It's a waste of time and no one gets anything worthwhile accomplished.
- a5seo 15y ago
  Seriously? Creating that page just got Freshdesk on the HN homepage and hurt Zendesk's reputation very badly. That's a twofer in my book. The fact that Zendesk is using "analyst" payola smacks of the worst practices of four quadrant research firms and enterprise software. "Want to the upper-right quadrant? Sure thing, the price will be..." So at least in this case, it was exposed and we can properly adjust the value of all involved's reputations.
- benatkin 15y ago
  It's a bad move for FreshDesk's company culture. It's a worse move for ZenDesk but a bad move for FreshDesk. They took this and made it a part of their company by registering a domain name and making a big, glittery page about it. Also, since ZenDesk isn't exactly a behemoth, and it names names, it's quite personal.
bjtitus 15y ago
I'm sure it will. It doesn't change my perception of them. In my opinion, anyone who thinks taking the time to create a web page for an argument or who thinks a product in the same field with a similar name is a copycat doesn't care about me, the customer. They should be spending their time improving the product, coming up with new ideas, or responding to legitimate support inquiries. Neither of these companies showed any "brilliant" response. Both end up looking bad.
- tdfx 15y ago
  If we had to pick a loser here, I'd still go with Zendesk.
- melvinram 15y ago
  You realize that it probably took FreshDesk maybe 2 hrs to create that page with the intention of defending the credibility of their reputation? And at the same time, by picking (or rather extending) a fight with the industry leader, they are gaining lots of visibility for their product. Was it worth it for FreshDesk to put in the 2 hours to defend their reputation? Of course. How is that not brilliant?
  - bjtitus 15y ago
    Sure. You can argue the publicity was worth something but I am certainly turned off by the way they went about it. They could have mockingly made a fo-ZenDesk logo or any number of other things that didn't make it look like they are on the defensive. Either way, as a customer I am more concerned about either of these companies using ANY of their time on this. Regardless of how much time they spent, it reflects on where their priorities lie.
  - drumdance 15y ago
    I agree. Guy Kawasaki suggests companies should pick fights with better known rivals. Apple vs. IBM back in the day is a perfect example. I now know who Freshdesk is (didn't before) and might consider them in the future. We used to use Zendesk but found it too expensive for our needs. Plug: we use Tender.
- 15y ago

yummies 15y ago

it's just another form of marketing. spending resources on marketing is a valid approach when you need to stand out from your competitors. with this new campaign, they're likely to get an infusion of customers and cash, which will in turn be more beneficial to their product than the 30 minutes it must have taken them to set up the mud slinging website.