What is the breakdown, is there a chart? Teams vs Slack vs Discord etc
Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
111–120 of 313 posts
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's particularly galling how Outlook invites *by default* include a Teams link. You can disable this on a per invite basis or in your settings, but it's pretty icky behaviour.
It may a per-tenant setting but I checked that and a new meeting created in Outlook doesn't contain a Teams link - you have to either select "New Teams Meeting" or select "New Meeting" and then explicitly make it a Teams meeting. New meetings created in Teams do include a Teams link - but isn't that what you would expect?
In my work Outlook, it's similar to what GP says. There is only "New Meeting" (not "New Teams Meeting") and the message starts out with a Teams link, and then I actively have to opt out of that with an extra button press in the meeting composer.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
"massive ad campaigns" is hardly an antitrust matter. Chrome ate Firefox and IE back in the day because it was monumentally better, technologically speaking.
> Chrome ate Firefox and IE back in the day because it was monumentally better, technologically speaking. The difference between Firefox and IE was orders of magnitude larger than the difference between Chrome and Firefox. The explosive growth from Chrome can't be explained just by it being better than competition, or Firefox would have replaced IE in 6 months earlier. The real explanation is that Chrome benefited fr…
Chrome was much much better than Firefox at the time, mainly because of V8. Firefox only got it's first JIT 9 months after Chrome.
On my 2003 PC the difference was very noticeable. I switched instantly.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#114Good for the EU. Teams was very late to the party and is winning due to the bundle.
It is almost unusable on my iPhone 14 pro max after the latest upgrade where it takes 1 minute of lag to respond to the join meeting notification.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you forced to use it? I certainly don't use it. I was able to remove it from Windows without any problems. You don't like it? you can use Linux or buy a Mac. There are very credible alternatives today. Edge is bundled with Windows and Chrome still has 80% of the market or more. I still don't see the problem.
The market for Teams isn't personal use: it's enterprise use. In enterprise, managed-device land, options are severely curtailed.
My current company uses Google's Workspace and Google Chat.
My previous company used Workspace also, but they used Slack.
For my startup, we use Google Workspace, and I would never ever pay the same amount of money I pay for GW to have Slack.
The value proposition of Slack is not that valuable to charge what they charge. I would happily pay 1 or 2 euros per month per user, no more.
I have never used Teams. Nobody is forcing me to.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, their marketshare overall is lower however in certain very large EU countries their market share is very high and their practices shouldn't escape scrutiny as this type of law also applies to smaller players. I suppose it's an issue of allocation of resources for the regulators. Smaller has less impact. The individual country regulators can also address this.
> in certain very large EU countries their market share is very high And which EU countries are those? I know a few in the 60s% market share range but that would hardly be considered “very high”.
How is being the market leader by a wide margin anything else than "very high market share"?
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you try to change the default browser on Windows (a setting ignored by some Microsoft apps, which will always use Edge btw.), you can't just change it, you get a pop-up going like: You SURE you wanna do that? Edge is better you know. And more secure. And shit. [ BIG BLUE CONTINUE WITH EDGE BUTTON ] Arial, 6pt grey on white, "Use my choice" link Edit: You also can't move or remove the Edge symbol from your deskto…
What does that have to do with Chrome?
Nothing, but it has to do with Microsoft, which the comment they were replying to talks about in its latter half.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#118This is just weird because there has been a chat app as part of Office since 2007 (Office Communicator, then Lync, then Skype for Business, then Teams).
That's way before Slack even existed.
Is the claim that it's anti-competitive simply because they made their existing chat functionality better? Or because Slack decided to launch a standalone product? Can I make a standalone Excel competitor and then claim Microsoft is anti-competitive for "bundling" Excel?
And a chat app is very much not out of place in an office productivity suite. I have to say, I don't understand the merits of this case at all.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#119Jeez man. Everyone keeps bashing on Microsoft for this shit. Have they seen Google, Amazon, etc?
The offense is using market control in one section to control another market.
Windows being tied to AD only was the offense. Windows being tied to IE was the offense.
Google being the place you buy ad services from, and the auction house that places them and the service a website owner sells ad space to. is the offense.
Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Back then I remember switching to Chrome for these reasons: 1. Feeling faster than firefox (still does) 2. Process separation for tabs. Firefox used to crash the whole browser, whereas chrome would crash just a single tab. 3. Shipped with support for Flash and PDFs
Speed is why I use Safari now. It feels like Chrome did compared to FF back in the day. It’s painful using Chrome by comparison. If it wasn’t for Chromes better dev tools I doubt I’d use it much
Only reason Safari feels fast is that it has avoided implementing features. There's still stuff that's been present in Chrome/Firefox for 10 years, but still doesn't work in Safari.
Does Google still show the old search results page design to Safari users? It did that for a long time.