211–220 of 246 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what world is it going to be "the same or even less money" to hire one or two sysadmins on a full-time basis than paying for a Slack subscription?
I don't know how large your company is, but with 10k+ employees, it's suddenly a reasonable option.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is paying another company better than getting employees and paying them the same or even less money?! When did this madness start?
In what world is it going to be "the same or even less money" to hire one or two sysadmins on a full-time basis than paying for a Slack subscription?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2 sysadmins will cost considerably more than a few slack accounts. Unless your company is huge.
> Unless your company is huge. Yes. Someone above have mentioned ibm using slack though. I think that's huge enough for the argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know how large your company is, but with 10k+ employees, it's suddenly a reasonable option.
With that many employees you're signing up for Slack's enterprise tier, and you can bet they price it so that they come out the right side of this cost/benefit calculation for a lot of companies.
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.
Do you stop trusting them then?
Best thing is that some messages go through despite returning 500s. This leads to our integrations spamming our companies channels with redundant messages while retrying. :/
Ouch, that one hurts. I don't know slack API but the contract expectation in the call should absolutely be "500 means the message failed to send" Tells me there's some subsystem throwing the error, not the actual messaging (or, if intermittent, something wrong with the distribution.) What do you want to bet it's some kind of new analytics?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
* 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…
> search engine that just work 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…
For work, the decision of which IM tool is most likely going to be a corporate one, without much choice of solution. I guess the problem here is the same as for other corporate tools. (And people have strong feelings about corporate tools, but it seems there are less strong feelings about "using jira vs bugzilla" as there are "using slack vs irc". Or maybe there are as much strong feelings.)
On the other end, I get the troubles with the "network" effect for out-of-work communities (open source projects, clubs, etc...) Such communities can at least have "some" level of debate about which solution to use, and balance the pros and cons as they see fit. It's completely acceptable for an OSS community to discourage using such platforms - as any other non-free, centralized platforms. We're still not forced to use anything.
Then, there is the "club of non-power user" situation. I would be hard pressed to ask someone from my drama club to setup and maintain an IRC server (neither do I want to do it.)
Thanks for adding this dimension.
Follow-up: is there a "nice" provider of some slack-like solution (mattermost, etc...) that hosts servers for communities of non-techies for not too much money ?
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
- Scrollback/history available in the main client interface people who newly join a channel (extraordinarily important during incident response)
- Ability to link to a message in history
- Ability to handle multi-line messages in a vaguely competent matter
- Image uploads, snippets, etc.
- Users of a GUI tool / web interface are first-class, users of a command-line client are second-class; this is unlike IRC, and important when the goal is a single chat system for the entire company, not just engineering (and usually a subset of engineering at that)
- Client/UI expectation that you do not catch up on every message unless you want to (like IRC, but unlike email)
- Quality integrations that have already been written with the third-party apps that you're already using
IRC and email have both been time-tested, and have failed the test.
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…