4 ms·
Very insightful, thank you. For "fun", a counter argument I would make is, if you took the Zoom product right when the pandemic hit and lockdowns started, and
by MuffinFlavored 4y ago
Very insightful, thank you.
For "fun", a counter argument I would make is,
if you took the Zoom product right when the pandemic hit and lockdowns started, and just did the bare minimum necessary to make it stable, performant, and scalable to handle HUGE influx in demand
would that have been good enough? with focus on, other than improving latency/audio quality/video quality and supporting small meetings all the way up to 500 person meetings, did you need to double engineering staff to achieve this, or could you have gotten away with less and the rest of the engineers got stuck working on random useless features just because it was cheap to borrow money and finance their salary at the time?
> Basic (free or free with credit card): 100 participants. Pro: 100 participants. Business: 300 participants. Enterprise: 500 participants.
- s1artibartfast 4y agoWhat is good enough? I think the relevant question is if the company would be in a better position today if they did the minimum vs loading up on staff and then laying them off. How much did it actually cost them to pay the extra employees? How much market share is worth paying ~1500 employees for two years? If Zoom fails, will it be because of this cost, or because they couldn't do more.