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

Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

windowscentral.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 313 posts

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#241

Post by bentcorner »

dingi wrote: post #234
TeMPOraL wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must be an unique snowflake, because I switched jobs around March 2020, and the new place used Teams exclusively, and... it was good. Not stellar, but good for the standards of software in this decade. Better than Slack, anyway. There were some weird glitches happening couple times a year, but nothing major. So either I'm incredibly lucky, or - my going hypothesis - Teams actually does work quite well, if you deplo…

I have experienced the same as well. I've been using team (on Linux for Christs sake) for past 3 years. Never had any major issues. Everything continues to be working as expexted. I'm using the web app on Chrome as a pinned tab since they are going to kill the Linux teams client.

I've never used this but apparently this wrapper is useful for linux people: https://github.com/IsmaelMartinez/teams-for-linux

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#242

Post by 0thgen »

collinc777 wrote: post #239

At what point does bundling become competitive vs non-competitive? It does seem like Microsoft can crush any Saas startup by including a "good enough" competitive product in their bundle.

As a consumer of these products, one central webapp / native app is extremely appealing (relative to having 8 apps open when I start my workday).

Is there a way we could prevent anti-competitive practices while _also_ encouraging service integration like MS 365 and the Google Software Suite?

Maybe a separate app that integrates various services (that you can swap in and out?) Something like Wavebox but nicer (and free-er)?

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#243

Post by gerash »

eitland wrote: post #38
veave wrote: post #20

Earlier 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.

Who else has been allowed to advertise on the front page of Google? None as far as I am aware of. Not even - again AFAIK - disaster relief after the biggest disasters we have seen after Google was founded. I'd argue that is quite clearly the same league as Microsoft pre-installing Media Player and Internet Explorer: taking advantage of a niche that they completely dominates and abusing it to wedge their way into anot…

Do you think one should be able to advertise Macbook on microsoft.com page or a Pixel phone on apple.com ?

how about a giant banner when you enter a Walmart store that reads "Just buy it on Amazon" ?

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#244

Post by manuelabeledo »

jowea wrote: post #237
manuelabeledo wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you complaining about Google advertising its own products on their own websites?

If Microsoft could get in trouble for bundling its own product (IE) on its own OS (Windows) then IMHO this can in fact be seen as abusing monopolistic market power in the search market to benefit in the browser market.

How is that even in the same category?

Google does not force you to install Chrome in order to use Search.

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#245

Post by badwolf »

mcny wrote: post #177
skrause wrote: post #28

My employer is a prime example for this case: We use Microsoft 365 because we need Microsoft Office and use their email hosting. And then we use Teams simply because it's already included in the package anyway, even though many employees hate it, but it's hard to argue for another solution because why pay for Slack when we already have Teams "for free"? And since Teams doesn't really need to compete on functionality…

My complaints are not even big ones. It costs Microsoft ZERO dollars to remove the asinine keyboard shortcut control + shift + c to start a call. Who does that? Why is this right next to the ctrl + shift + v (for unformatted paste) What is the point of collecting all this metrics (kusto, whatever) if you don't ACT on it? My complaint against Azure DevOps: Why is there no "date" field? From what I've heard there are i…

I will never understand how anyone thought "ctrl shift C" was a good idea to start a call -_-

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#246

Post by marcosdumay »

mcny wrote: post #177
skrause wrote: post #28

My employer is a prime example for this case: We use Microsoft 365 because we need Microsoft Office and use their email hosting. And then we use Teams simply because it's already included in the package anyway, even though many employees hate it, but it's hard to argue for another solution because why pay for Slack when we already have Teams "for free"? And since Teams doesn't really need to compete on functionality…

My complaints are not even big ones. It costs Microsoft ZERO dollars to remove the asinine keyboard shortcut control + shift + c to start a call. Who does that? Why is this right next to the ctrl + shift + v (for unformatted paste) What is the point of collecting all this metrics (kusto, whatever) if you don't ACT on it? My complaint against Azure DevOps: Why is there no "date" field? From what I've heard there are i…

Oh, my one complaint about azure devops is that when somebody goes to the build or release pages and interacts with a build or release, the default action should never be to edit them. That's asinine and makes onboarding people way harder than it should be.

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#247

Post by marcosdumay »

consp wrote: post #59
skrause wrote: post #28

My employer is a prime example for this case: We use Microsoft 365 because we need Microsoft Office and use their email hosting. And then we use Teams simply because it's already included in the package anyway, even though many employees hate it, but it's hard to argue for another solution because why pay for Slack when we already have Teams "for free"? And since Teams doesn't really need to compete on functionality…

I've been forced to use it because it's the only "allowed" one for a project I'm on (since the other party has the "we already have teams for free" syndrome). It's horrible to work with, sound fails to function half of the time and it is "incompatible" with firefox (our main browser of choice). I tried using the linux client but it simply will not allow me to connect to anyone and keeps telling me I need to login and…

> it is "incompatible" with firefox

Somehow, everything works, except for starting and receiving calls. Meetings work just fine, so it's not lack of some browser functionality.

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#248

Post by marcosdumay »

toyg wrote: post #85
omk wrote: post #79

Interop compliance should be a thing. Enterprise customers are missing the plot here. Please ask your software vendors to support interoperability. Example - Outlook should support/declare standard interfaces for video calling meeting links from other products. I see the need for a body for enterprise integration standards. Please help me such a body if there already is one. I look specifically for something of the l…

> I see the need for a body for enterprise integration standards. Both ISO and IETF could and should do that. IETF in particular seems to be less effective than it used to be - an RFC used to mean something, to carry some weight, but now they're often just words into the void.

> used to mean something, to carry some weight

When was that? AFAIK, the great differential of RFCs is that they never carried any weight, and as a consequence the process wasn't taken over by entrenched interests.

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#249

Post by marcosdumay »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #202
eitland wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who else has been allowed to advertise on the front page of Google? None as far as I am aware of. Not even - again AFAIK - disaster relief after the biggest disasters we have seen after Google was founded. I'd argue that is quite clearly the same league as Microsoft pre-installing Media Player and Internet Explorer: taking advantage of a niche that they completely dominates and abusing it to wedge their way into anot…

Are you complaining about Google advertising its own products on their own websites?

Yes, that's how anti-competitive practices look like.

Re: Microsoft faces antitrust scrutiny from the EU over Teams, Office 365

#250

Post by lenkite »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #129
nineteen999 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By mid-April was in a usable state. Do you mean April 2024 or 2025? Because the Teams I use on a regular daily basis is still unusable garbage. Granted it's better than February 2020, but it's still a train wreck of chats that don't work, calls dropped often, and files that won't attach to messages. Not that I am all that fond of Slack either.

I must be an unique snowflake, because I switched jobs around March 2020, and the new place used Teams exclusively, and... it was good. Not stellar, but good for the standards of software in this decade. Better than Slack, anyway. There were some weird glitches happening couple times a year, but nothing major. So either I'm incredibly lucky, or - my going hypothesis - Teams actually does work quite well, if you deplo…

My experience is the same. It was OK but flaky in 2020 and I un-fairly blamed the React native and JS for the subpar experience. Improved considerably by mid-2023 though I still wish it took lesser system resources. Probably will never happen.
Post reply on HN