4 ms·

uh.. i dont see the problem? They are only using it for video conferencing. day to day collab still on slack...

ketchupdebugger 4y ago
Its like forced conversion. It only benefits MSFT. Teams get to claim github as a customer, and MSFT saves some money. This might be small, but usually this opens the door to a whole suite of software being shoved down github's work/tech stack.
- aldarisbm 4y ago
  I'm all for dogfooding, the only meaningful difference between slack and Teams to me, is the search for actual information that I know I've encountered in the past (it's easier on slack IMO), and the awesome way to interact/thread with conversations in a natural way. Video-conferencing wise, I always have more problems with slack than with zoom/teams.
- tkone 4y ago
  this already happened to some extent. the “blessed” way to develop github is in vscode (from ms), using codespaces (from ms), running on azure (from ms). vim/emacs users can use the terminal (although the codespace and port forwarding, at first, had to be done via vscode exclusively) but your entire toolstack needs to be installed each time you launch a new one. collaborating with anyone at ms already meant you were using teams to some extent. (former github developer)
- TechBro8615 4y ago
  This way they also don't send all their internal company communications to a third party, which would be extra stupid when you have your own in-house conferencing software to use instead.
- cpuguy83 4y ago
  I mean... it's a pretty hard sell to say "Hey boss person, can we use our competitor's software to discuss company business?" My team also used Slack when I joined and were eventually required to move to Teams. We aren't forbidden from using Slack, I'm in multiple Slacks collaborating with various OSS projects and foundations every day.
capableweb 4y ago
> They are only using it for video conferencing. day to day collab still on slack... If they're already using Slack, Slack has video conferencing and they are trying to reduce costs, why not centralize everything in Slack or Teams?
- bgm1975 4y ago
  I suspect they’re not replacing Slack’s video capabilities with this move. They are replacing Zoom’s.
- aldarisbm 4y ago
  Not sure, I dont work at Microsoft, but if my company did 70% of what slack does, sometimes significantly better (IAM). I would too, want my employees to use my software, and with that raise problems and make it better. I understand the frustration of some people, but this is by no means something oppresive at all. A lot of companies use "X" office suite, and use zoom for calls , etc. It's okay for everything to not be centralized, always.
yamtaddle 4y ago
Slack has video conferencing. Every redundant tool a company makes workers use makes work less pleasant. I'd expect at some point they'll push them the rest of the way onto Teams, to reduce that redundancy. Which will be even worse, because Teams is so incredibly bad.
- aldarisbm 4y ago
  Slack's video conferencing is archaic compared to something like zoom (maybe not teams), but out of all of the video conferencing tools, slack is the worst.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    It's at least a decade ahead of Zoom on Linux. The latter's like using 00s Skype.
- lttlrck 4y ago
  Slack video conferencing was absolutely awful and one of the main reasons we switched to Teams a couple of years back. Is it better now? There seem to be plenty of commenters combining Slack and Zoom so seems not. That's a redundancy right there that Teams solves.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    It used to be god-awful but has been pretty OK for the last year or two. Not as good as Zoom, but close enough for many use-cases. I haven't tried it for really giant "rooms" but 99% of the time those would be better as a broadcast, anyway.

Its like forced conversion. It only benefits MSFT. Teams get to claim github as a customer, and MSFT saves some money. This might be small, but usually this opens the door to a whole suite of software being shoved down github's work/tech stack.

aldarisbm 4y ago
I'm all for dogfooding, the only meaningful difference between slack and Teams to me, is the search for actual information that I know I've encountered in the past (it's easier on slack IMO), and the awesome way to interact/thread with conversations in a natural way. Video-conferencing wise, I always have more problems with slack than with zoom/teams.
tkone 4y ago
this already happened to some extent. the “blessed” way to develop github is in vscode (from ms), using codespaces (from ms), running on azure (from ms). vim/emacs users can use the terminal (although the codespace and port forwarding, at first, had to be done via vscode exclusively) but your entire toolstack needs to be installed each time you launch a new one. collaborating with anyone at ms already meant you were using teams to some extent. (former github developer)
TechBro8615 4y ago
This way they also don't send all their internal company communications to a third party, which would be extra stupid when you have your own in-house conferencing software to use instead.
cpuguy83 4y ago
I mean... it's a pretty hard sell to say "Hey boss person, can we use our competitor's software to discuss company business?" My team also used Slack when I joined and were eventually required to move to Teams. We aren't forbidden from using Slack, I'm in multiple Slacks collaborating with various OSS projects and foundations every day.

capableweb 4y ago

> They are only using it for video conferencing. day to day collab still on slack... If they're already using Slack, Slack has video conferencing and they are trying to reduce costs, why not centralize everything in Slack or Teams?

bgm1975 4y ago
I suspect they’re not replacing Slack’s video capabilities with this move. They are replacing Zoom’s.
aldarisbm 4y ago
Not sure, I dont work at Microsoft, but if my company did 70% of what slack does, sometimes significantly better (IAM). I would too, want my employees to use my software, and with that raise problems and make it better. I understand the frustration of some people, but this is by no means something oppresive at all. A lot of companies use "X" office suite, and use zoom for calls , etc. It's okay for everything to not be centralized, always.

yamtaddle 4y ago

Slack has video conferencing. Every redundant tool a company makes workers use makes work less pleasant. I'd expect at some point they'll push them the rest of the way onto Teams, to reduce that redundancy. Which will be even worse, because Teams is so incredibly bad.

aldarisbm 4y ago
Slack's video conferencing is archaic compared to something like zoom (maybe not teams), but out of all of the video conferencing tools, slack is the worst.
- OJFord 4y ago
  It's at least a decade ahead of Zoom on Linux. The latter's like using 00s Skype.
lttlrck 4y ago
Slack video conferencing was absolutely awful and one of the main reasons we switched to Teams a couple of years back. Is it better now? There seem to be plenty of commenters combining Slack and Zoom so seems not. That's a redundancy right there that Teams solves.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  It used to be god-awful but has been pretty OK for the last year or two. Not as good as Zoom, but close enough for many use-cases. I haven't tried it for really giant "rooms" but 99% of the time those would be better as a broadcast, anyway.