4 ms·

Teams is legitimately such awful software that it alone serves as evidence that Microsoft needs to be broken up. At any given point of using the software, there

Teams is legitimately such awful software that it alone serves as evidence that Microsoft needs to be broken up. At any given point of using the software, there are between 5 and 7 "..." buttons on the UI hiding menu options. There is no "test audio" button. You have to call their loopback server. Nobody can compete with Microsoft's office suite all-in-one + the kitchen sink bundle, though, so it persists.

diggan 2y ago
> Teams is legitimately such awful software that it alone serves as evidence that Microsoft needs to be broken up That has to be the weirdest argument I've heard for why a company should be broken up. Microsoft obviously doesn't understand UX nor UI design, hence the company needs to be broken up into parts? I agree with the former, but I don't understand how the conclusion would fix that.
- bearjaws 2y ago
  Why is that weird? A product that would not have stood on its own, would have 100% failed, has only finally been made DECENT almost 8 years later due to the fact its bolted on to O365.
  - blibble 2y ago
    > has only finally been made DECENT almost 8 years later decent? you can't mean teams?? one instance of the client uses more memory and resources than every ircd on the planet combined
- dijit 2y ago
  The argument is that Teams is so legitimately terrible that it's dominance is proof that market forces aren't working and that Microsoft is using its dominance in one area to enter other areas.
Cockbrand 2y ago
> Nobody can compete with Microsoft's office suite all-in-one + the kitchen sink bundle, though, so it persists. Well, there's Google Workspace (and a few smaller, less comprehensive suites) as a very competitive alternative with everything + kitchen sink, but - nobody ever got fired buying ~IBM~ Microsoft - MS is already in all enterprises, so it's quite easy for their sales people to position their products - the people who make the decision to buy M365 aren't the power users who suffer from the poor design in the products - there's a huge vendor lock-in due to lots of legacy .docx, .pptx and .xlsx files that won't be parsed correctly by 3rd party software due to the formats' intentional complexity
- dijit 2y ago
  Interesting factoid about Google Workspace: if you send me a google docs link, I, with any Google account (even Federated identity account) can use and modify that document as a regular user. That's not true for Microsoft, and I was forced to buy some Office software for our business because an external company used Microsoft products. Quite infectious. Yet they could use our tools free of charge, they just refused.

diggan 2y ago

> Teams is legitimately such awful software that it alone serves as evidence that Microsoft needs to be broken up That has to be the weirdest argument I've heard for why a company should be broken up. Microsoft obviously doesn't understand UX nor UI design, hence the company needs to be broken up into parts? I agree with the former, but I don't understand how the conclusion would fix that.

bearjaws 2y ago
Why is that weird? A product that would not have stood on its own, would have 100% failed, has only finally been made DECENT almost 8 years later due to the fact its bolted on to O365.
- blibble 2y ago
  > has only finally been made DECENT almost 8 years later decent? you can't mean teams?? one instance of the client uses more memory and resources than every ircd on the planet combined
dijit 2y ago
The argument is that Teams is so legitimately terrible that it's dominance is proof that market forces aren't working and that Microsoft is using its dominance in one area to enter other areas.

Cockbrand 2y ago

> Nobody can compete with Microsoft's office suite all-in-one + the kitchen sink bundle, though, so it persists. Well, there's Google Workspace (and a few smaller, less comprehensive suites) as a very competitive alternative with everything + kitchen sink, but - nobody ever got fired buying ~IBM~ Microsoft - MS is already in all enterprises, so it's quite easy for their sales people to position their products - the people who make the decision to buy M365 aren't the power users who suffer from the poor design in the products - there's a huge vendor lock-in due to lots of legacy .docx, .pptx and .xlsx files that won't be parsed correctly by 3rd party software due to the formats' intentional complexity

dijit 2y ago
Interesting factoid about Google Workspace: if you send me a google docs link, I, with any Google account (even Federated identity account) can use and modify that document as a regular user. That's not true for Microsoft, and I was forced to buy some Office software for our business because an external company used Microsoft products. Quite infectious. Yet they could use our tools free of charge, they just refused.