Atlassian's "Questions for Confluence" is only half the price. https://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence/questions
I've never used teams, but speaking as a user of questions, half the price and third the usability.
Stack Overflow for Teams
21–30 of 163 posts
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#22Do you think we'll get the "closed as primarly opinion-based" flag squad on SO for Teams too?
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#23My question is, is this better than your self-hosted wiki? At least that's cheaper and isn't a vendor lock-in. Sure wiki doesn't have the best possible UI and the UX might be too so-and-so. If I were in a position to buy this kind of service I'd still want something more out of it. Maybe if it offered a way to export Slack threads into SO as questions so they wouldn't get lost. Sure you could generate those questions…
Nearly every company I've worked at is already paying for a vendor locked-in wiki. Of course, ADDING StackOverflow means they're now paying for TWO vendor locked-in wikis (at least until they can shut down the old one, if ever), but it may be still be a net improvement.
FWIW, Stack Overflow for Teams isn't a wiki.
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#24I'm sure I'm ignorant of other reasonable options, but this one is quite appealing as a small co, even if only used by one person. Just yesterday I was thinking about better ways to store easy-to-find answers to those dang tech issues that pop up once every six months. "How do I install pip manually on OS X with xyz constraints?"
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#25Why use this when Discourse is free? It is an open source product that lets you store all the data in your own database. And it’s by the same guys, too.
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#26Why use this when Discourse is free? It is an open source product that lets you store all the data in your own database. And it’s by the same guys, too.
Because Discourse is a message board, not a Q&A site?
Not bashing Discourse at all. In fact I wish I saw it in the wild more often.
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nearly every company I've worked at is already paying for a vendor locked-in wiki. Of course, ADDING StackOverflow means they're now paying for TWO vendor locked-in wikis (at least until they can shut down the old one, if ever), but it may be still be a net improvement.
FWIW, Stack Overflow for Teams isn't a wiki.
Its creator would disagree with you. [1]
[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2008/12/28/stack-overflow-is-...
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#28Why use this when Discourse is free? It is an open source product that lets you store all the data in your own database. And it’s by the same guys, too.
Because Discourse is a message board, not a Q&A site? Not bashing Discourse at all. In fact I wish I saw it in the wild more often.
A forum is nearly there. With open source, all you need is a third party plugin to turn it into what you want:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/discourse-solved-accepted-answe...
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#29>team member has been fired for posting off-topic question
Re: Stack Overflow for Teams
#30So much of the core mechanics of SO relies on SEO and a community of volunteer moderators, neither if which really exist in a corporation.
I suppose if a company had a paid librarian function, this could be successful. But in that case, even a normal wiki would probably work.
I seem to remember an article from Joel or Jeff many years ago describing why this exact model won't work. Can't seem to find it now though.