Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Horror of Microsoft Teams

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 344 posts

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#181

Post by paxys »

bluedino wrote: post #47

Microsoft ruins Skype, then tries making their own communication tool. Ugh. What is it again that Microsoft is getting such accolades for? Visual Studio Code is fantastic. Github is great, but they bought that. Office 365? OneDrive? I'll give you those. Hosted Exchange is a thorn in my side. Internet Explorer and Edge are (were?) both a joke. I don't have any experience with Azure. Xbox is great. Their server product…

A large chunk of the world runs on Excel. The Office desktop suite is literally what has kept Microsoft alive and thriving as a company.

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#182

Post by cleandreams »

We use it heavily but these aren't the features I dislike. In function Teams is a workflow browser but compared to real browsers it is very low functioning. No good bookmark system and ugh, no tabs. Even the back arrow doesn't scope properly, and anyway I find myself jumping around because I need multiple contexts. I find the meetings and phone to be fine. It does suck memory like a hog. Because it is a workflow browser I have to have the app open and also several browser accessed versions. That means my laptop slows down a lot.

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#183

Post by paxys »

lowdose wrote: post #66
bluedino wrote: post #47

Microsoft ruins Skype, then tries making their own communication tool. Ugh. What is it again that Microsoft is getting such accolades for? Visual Studio Code is fantastic. Github is great, but they bought that. Office 365? OneDrive? I'll give you those. Hosted Exchange is a thorn in my side. Internet Explorer and Edge are (were?) both a joke. I don't have any experience with Azure. Xbox is great. Their server product…

> Microsoft ruins Skype, then tries making their own communication tool. Even some rumors MS is in the market to buy Zoom.

They definitely missed that boat. Zoom is way too expensive after their IPO.

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#185

Post by paggle »

untog wrote: post #146
Solar19 wrote: post #139

The Teams client is built on Electron? Why? Developers need to stop building slow applications. This is ridiculous. It's 2019 and software is slower than it was in the 90s. It must take an enormous number of CPU cycles to execute simple tasks in an Election-based app. It's just incredibly inefficient. I heard similar things about Slack – that it was built on Node, maybe Electron, and was dog slow, especially to open.…

You can make an efficient Electron app, just look at VS Code.

Clearly whatever people at MS made Teams do not talk to the people who made VS Code

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#186

Post by vezycash »

evilotto wrote: post #108
vezycash wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've changed. Now they routinely redesign stuff. Add stuff that no one wants and cripple or remove those they want. And then make it slower. Outlook web is a perfect example. It's 10x slower since the last redesign and their exclusive killer feature - SWEEP no longer works for me.

Have you sent feedback?

Having lived through Windows phone's saga, Windows 8, 8.1, 10 and the first set of outlook.com redesigns, I know one this - their feedback tool is a placebo button, a self therapy session to get stuff off one's chest.

Microsoft doesn't listen to feedback through their official channels. They might step back temporarily when there's overwhelming negative outcry from the news but they'll definitely attempt it again after a while.

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#187

Post by jimnotgym »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #67
jimnotgym wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not in fact installed with every Office 365 install. I just had Teams pushed with a separate group policy because of this. They will overtake Slack easily since it is a free addition to most 365 plans

Newer Office 365 client builds are installing it by default. Worse, they didn't move away from the per-user installation. Instead they just took the brain-damaged route of force-installing it inside each user's profile when they logon. I think that's a real dick move, but, then again, I sometimes think I'm the last admin in the world who gives a damn about efficiency.

Again it depends. I downloaded an installer only yesterday that did not have it, even when it was part of the subscription. It is also not being pushed as an office update to my users yet. But then again I haven't checked if that is because WSUS is holding it back

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#189

Post by thaumasiotes »

inetknght wrote: post #35
stuart78 wrote: post #20

At my work, we use Teams a fair bit, and I'll go out on the limb to defend it (a limb I'm quite familiar with at this point ;) ). Thinking of it as a Slack alternative is, IMO, the wrong starting point. We barely use it for chat (as we have Slack as well). Instead, we use it as a file share and central information home. Each group within a team has a channel and we use the tabs to track meeting notes, embed external…

> we use it for file sharing File sharing: apparently still a problem almost four _decades_ after the Internet was invented.

Well, the Internet everyone uses isn't really designed for it. HTTP is a request/response model. But the model of filesharing is that I have a bunch of data and I want to send it to you, not that I have a bunch of data and I want you to ask me for it.

File sharing over the internet means setting up a webserver, after which it works beautifully. But nobody wants to do that. They want to use browsers.

TCP isn't asymmetric in the same way, but who's out there thinking of raw TCP as "the Internet"?

Re: The Horror of Microsoft Teams

#190

Post by rtpg »

bdamm wrote: post #157
dleslie wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer native widgets to whatever application-enforced fad of the year is current. Apps are lauded for providing "dark mode" now; when ten years ago I simply switched GTK themes. To say nothing of accessibility. We've gone way backwards in UX.

Absolutely. Developers can pick from many native-widget frameworks in pretty much any language, heck I bet there are even Qt bindings for node. But there are just so many people doing web development, it's probably a hiring/design issue in that hiring web developers and designers is just so much easier than hiring whatever people know the GUI framework that's driving much of the code.

There's also the fact that the UI tools for web development are mostly way easier to use than Gtk or Qt.

Even "simple" stuff like Tcl/Tk is not trivial to get working easily or well.

HTML + CSS + something like React is miles simpler than writing something for Gtk. Qt has QML now but the C++ Qt bindings are _pretty hard_! And after all that work you don't (by default) get an app that resizes as nicely as the HTML/CSS box model does!

I think that WxWidgets has one of the better usability stories for cross-platform native, though.

If someone wrote a good feeling UI library that generated native UIs and had good JS and Python bindings, so many people would be happy to use it, I think. But right now, despite all the shortcomings, web tech is pretty easy to prototype in.

Post reply on HN