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

GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 725 posts

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#211

Post by millzlane »

TylerE wrote: post #205
samiru wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if those who complain about Teams actually use it. They might not. My company forces us to use Google Chat. I would take Teams any day.

I am forced to use Teams on a Mac. It's beyond horrible. Messages sometimes take an hour+ to appear. I would crawl through broken glass for google chat. Teams is sooooo bad.

I'm using a 2017 2.3ghz i5 with 16gbs of ram.

I'm in 7 different teams and have over over 15 pinned chats and IM's.

The only delay I see is when comparing desktop app to the mobile app.

Even video chats are bearable and work fine with even background effects turned on.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#212

Post by aspaviento »

Using it on the browser:

- it's wonky

- 1 on 1 calls not always share the screen and I need to hang up, refresh the browser and call again

- translation stopped working both ways. Once a text is translated it doesn't go back to its original language

- it's a mess if you make a lot of group calls with different people. You end up having trillions of opened chat. I ended up pinning the main ones to keep them at the top and ignore the rest.

- code snippets are just awful. They are a box inside of a box and you always need to click on expand to see the code.

- music when you are on hold can't be stopped which can make you crazy. I always hang up or mute the tab

- group video calls don't have an option to see everybody in the same screen. Now it's like divided in pages

And I could go on and on. Discord is thousands of times better than this.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#213

Post by mgkimsal »

treesknees wrote: post #199
apnew wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally sitting here right now trying to figure out how to get simple things going compared to slack after being forced to move to teams from slack (not GitHub). I am all for dogfooding here, but if the dog-fooding is not improving the product it shows that the goal is to eat market because of lopsided ecosystem monopoly. Screw MS and MS Teams. eg. : We need a tag in a shared channel so that we can provide single p…

From the quote it appears the goal is to save money. From the numbers I found, GitHub could be paying upwards of $35k/month in licensing for Slack users. In a climate where companies are trying to shed expenses, wouldn't it make sense to bring that expense in-house?

To people only focused on short term dollars, perhaps. But what impact will it have? Certainly an impact on productivity in short term, perhaps longer? Are there equivalent replacements for all the slack hooks people have in place now? How long will it take to become 'just as' productive in Teams? 1 month? 3 months?

$35k... that's... under $500k/year in licensing they're paying? Will they take more than a $500k hit in productivity?

By HN standards, $500k isn't even the loaded cost of one intern these days in SV, but... even in the 'normal' western business world... $500k/year is likely the cost of 2-3 engineering staff. Trying to eke that much savings in the short term seems short sighted.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#214

Post by TylerE »

treesknees wrote: post #199
apnew wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally sitting here right now trying to figure out how to get simple things going compared to slack after being forced to move to teams from slack (not GitHub). I am all for dogfooding here, but if the dog-fooding is not improving the product it shows that the goal is to eat market because of lopsided ecosystem monopoly. Screw MS and MS Teams. eg. : We need a tag in a shared channel so that we can provide single p…

From the quote it appears the goal is to save money. From the numbers I found, GitHub could be paying upwards of $35k/month in licensing for Slack users. In a climate where companies are trying to shed expenses, wouldn't it make sense to bring that expense in-house?

So you save about 1 employee cost per year, and make the other thousands miserable and less productive? Definition of penny wise, pound foolish.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#216

Post by kahrl »

AndrewVos wrote: post #164
aliqot wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I said was a guess based on my contextual perception of the unknown term 'spectrumite', not a literal explanation.

No I think you’re right.

I think you understood exactly what I meant the first time, but then feigned ignorance in order to be able to virtual signal and say the same tired old line "this is why I don't come here anymore" as you continue to lurk.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#217

Post by mk89 »

jacquesm wrote: post #194

Teams is so horrific we banned it. If you force us to use teams you'll have to find another supplier. Seriously, it is incomprehensible that Microsoft would ship something so utterly broken. I know they don't have a reputation for writing good software but Teams is on another level, and I don't mean that in a positive way. I've really tried to get it to work but it is so messed up that I don't think it can be done. M…

What's the issue with zoom? I think it's one of the best software I have on my machine. It never ever stopped working since I have it installed, not even in meetings/webinars with 1000+ people. And the integration with Slack is really convenient, you can start a meeting in seconds anywhere you are.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#218

Post by wvenable »

jacquesm wrote: post #194

Teams is so horrific we banned it. If you force us to use teams you'll have to find another supplier. Seriously, it is incomprehensible that Microsoft would ship something so utterly broken. I know they don't have a reputation for writing good software but Teams is on another level, and I don't mean that in a positive way. I've really tried to get it to work but it is so messed up that I don't think it can be done. M…

It's so weird -- I use Teams all the time and I've never had a serious problem with it.

It's not the greatest software ever made but it's certainly functional. It's definitely getting a lot of work done to it.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#219

Post by xattt »

wvenable wrote: post #218
jacquesm wrote: post #194

Teams is so horrific we banned it. If you force us to use teams you'll have to find another supplier. Seriously, it is incomprehensible that Microsoft would ship something so utterly broken. I know they don't have a reputation for writing good software but Teams is on another level, and I don't mean that in a positive way. I've really tried to get it to work but it is so messed up that I don't think it can be done. M…

It's so weird -- I use Teams all the time and I've never had a serious problem with it. It's not the greatest software ever made but it's certainly functional. It's definitely getting a lot of work done to it.

Your definition of broken is likely different than the GP.

Re: GitHub staff are required to use Teams by Sep 1, 2023

#220

Post by gcapu »

samiru wrote: post #196
revscat wrote: post #147

To everyone at GitHub: I’m so sorry. I don’t mean this in a clever way, either. Teams is awful and it will make your lives worse to one degree or another.

I wonder if those who complain about Teams actually use it. They might not. My company forces us to use Google Chat. I would take Teams any day.

I use it and I would be happy if Teams was able to do basic copy/paste. When you copy, it copies things you didn’t select and doesn’t copy some things you selected. When pasting, it auto-formats the text and does a terrible job at it. It’s a disaster. I hope the Teams team is forced to use Teams.
Post reply on HN