191–200 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd imagine that they have separate, encrypted siloed search indexes for each paying organization. Why would someone put sensitive information on Slack otherwise?
From what I've seen, there are plenty of companies that keep sensitive data out-of-band for just that reason, and have policies to keep it out of their Slacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We live in interesting times. Organizations that refuse to use Slack are at a disadvantage. When employees show up and realize there's no Slack, they start to analyze all other company decisions. How much effort could be saved just by using Slack? Those secrets had better be important to justify this loss. There are alternatives. Rocket Chat is self-hosted, and maybe it's sufficient. But second-place software will al…
> When employees show up and realise there's no Slack, they start to analyze all other company decisions. If I hire you, and your concern is "why can't I use this one specific chat service", I hired the wrong fucking person.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think of all of those WhatsApp has been the most successful both in terms of moat defense purposes and it still has the potential of turning into something like WeChat or LINE (or what they're doing with FB Messenger itself) with its own monetization. For Skype I think it was mostly about rounding out the office suite, MS doesn't want anyone else getting a toehold in workplace collaboration and expanding from there…
Agreed. These purchases seem to work the best when they're used for defensive purposes and to round out a product offering that already has a substantial userbase . Whatever gadgets they might hang off the app, they're fundamentally a way for people to talk to each other. If you don't have the people, why would you need a slick implementation? As you mentioned, the app would go out of vogue and users would move on. A…
Sounds like they really want in on the communication game.
"Of the so-called big-five tech companies in the US, Amazon is the only one without a messaging platform." https://chime.aws/
Serious question..... but also more me fleshing out my thoughts on messaging apps.... What is the point in buying a messaging app? - instant messenger - ICQ - Skype - Yammer - WhatsApp They all seem to be popular for a short time and then fad away. What does owing one of these get a company? The case against owning them is that they all go out of favour and you only have a small window, say up to 5 years, where your…
Given how deep it is in a company's workflow you could think of it almost like an operating system where apps can attach to.
It would perfectly fit to eg salesforce, google etc
Unsure what Amazon's goal would be - maybe "enterprise as customers" are the interlinking part between ecommerce and webservices
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they let the product fade because they weren't making very much money. It hard to have a vibrant product when you can't pay the rent.
MSN messenger and Yahoo both had significant funds.
Really believe that Microsoft should have bought Slack. It makes perfect sense for them and aligns with their vision to be the productivity center of everyone's workflow. Microsoft doesnt understand this space at all. Look what they are doing to Skype by making it more like Snapchat when their main use case is business related. Teams also feels so unfinished.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chime is for both, it's just not very good at text.
This is not true. We use Chime for text every day. It doesn't have all the 3rd party integrations that Slack does, but it give you the same basic functionality. Disclaimer: Work for AWS.
Disclaimer: Also work for AWS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They might be less interested in the app itself, and more interested in the giant corpus of conversation stored therein.
Which brings the point, who would ever sign on to use Slack/continue to use Slack when Bezos & Co. could be scouring through your sensitive company conversations?