201–210 of 246 posts
reminds me of that one time a genius at IBM created an `ibm-global-announcements` channel and force-invited 200'000 people in it, and then some guy `@channel`d and all ibm's slack workspaces were down for 30 minutes https://status.slack.com/ibm/2018-03/f01d4c22cd953dd7 https://i.imgur.com/Rk6Kdgp.png EDIT: also that channel made using slack impossible for mac book air users, they had around 80% cpu usage for slack. s…
> 200'000
Interesting. Why an apostrophe?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interestingly that you say this; we need an additional layer called layer 8. As app is 7 but we have grown beyond the seven into meta layers of service types which have become the favric of how we operate... such as email, txt, chat etc to keep all other aspects of infra up and running.
the OSI model is not a truthful representation of the different layer of networking. Things get messy between layer 2 and 3 (ARP for instance?). Also, everything above layer 4 is a enormous mess, considering that stuff is usually happening at the application itself anyways. There are network protocols which have proper OSI seperation, but they are rarely used. (IS-IS in combination with CLNS for instance).
A failure of mine was to not keep a project portfolio runbook which i could look back upon.
Imagine a system where all your status reports were logged and searchable - that would be move valuable than linkedin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What an incredibly arrogant generalization to make. You know there are also production issues created by moving too slow and failing to address pending scalability issues, right?
heh. > failing to address pending scalability issues How is that not related to not getting enough funding and resources? And yes, having scalability issues means moving too fast - the _business_ moving too fast.
Can someone explain to me why any company should outsource something as critical as internal communication to a company that is 5 years old? The video messaging left aside, is it really that better than time-tested solutions like email or just running an IRC server?
Ive always said Slack is IRC for millennials. "The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again."
Came here for the "Slack shouldn't exist anyway" comments and was not disappointed. Or rather I was, but in a different way. Best wishes to all of the folks at Slack and those who depend on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Features is not the only thing, does it have well funded sales team and strong corporate support ? Slack itself did support IRC till recently, the product is not just a sum of its features
> does it have well funded sales team and strong corporate support Get 2 sysadmins. 2 because of redundancy. Pay them to maintain your service. "well funded sales team and corporate support". F that. Trust your employees.
One problem with Slack we have in the finance world is that _literally everything_ employees say on company assets needs to be recorded and readily accessible for audit (No this is not an invasion of privacy, you're on company time on company systems, we don't peer into your personal phone or anything). Unfortunately, Slack does not do this very well. I'd really like to know if there's another service that _does_ do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> does it have well funded sales team and strong corporate support Get 2 sysadmins. 2 because of redundancy. Pay them to maintain your service. "well funded sales team and corporate support". F that. Trust your employees.
2 sysadmins will cost considerably more than a few slack accounts. Unless your company is huge.
Yes. Someone above have mentioned ibm using slack though. I think that's huge enough for the argument.
Can someone explain to me why any company should outsource something as critical as internal communication to a company that is 5 years old? The video messaging left aside, is it really that better than time-tested solutions like email or just running an IRC server?
* search engine that just work * push-notifications that just work * client available for enough people * copy / pasting images that just work (the'll never admit it, but animated gif is their killer feature) * stable-enough infrastructure for something that costs you 15€/month/user not taken from your "salary" budget (often a different and substantially less taxed part) * and their outages are funny (receiving messa…
For some definitions of "just" and "working". Even ignoring the business limitation, the UX of Slack search is meh. That said, I'm yet to see any of the modern web&mobile-oriented IMs that would have a decent search UX.
But yeah, your list is solid. They offer plenty of value, just mixed with plenty of negatives.
A big source of the complaints against Slack is usually the network effect - in context of both work and OSS communities, it's usually somebody else that makes the decision and imposes it on you, forcing you to run face-first into all the "legitimate reasons to not use it" you listed. Half of the pain would be gone if they opened up their service to third-party clients; I'd say the reason they didn't have as much opposition from people initially is because they run the bait-and-switch with IRC gateway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Features is not the only thing, does it have well funded sales team and strong corporate support ? Slack itself did support IRC till recently, the product is not just a sum of its features
> does it have well funded sales team and strong corporate support Get 2 sysadmins. 2 because of redundancy. Pay them to maintain your service. "well funded sales team and corporate support". F that. Trust your employees.