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

311–320 of 725 posts

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

#311

Post by polyvisual »

ukoki wrote: post #279
aspaviento wrote: post #212

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…

You forgot the worst one! When you copy a message in Teams, it "helpfully" adds a header so you end up pasting "[Tuesday 12:54] John Doe" into random form fields / your terminal / your browser location bar ten times a day

My lord, that behaviour drives me mad.

The experience of using the editor for writing and editing is horrendous.

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

#312

Post by dragonwriter »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #269
wvenable wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does it mean to be worst-in-class for text chat or video conferencing. Video conferences look and sound great. Text chat is text chat. What am I missing here that's so awful?

For chats, it is embarrassingly slow at rendering. Seemingly only maintains the last ~two dozen messages in memory, if you scroll back in history, you have to painfully wait for it to retrieve the text and then render it. Weird rendering bugs frequently. Meanwhile, I remember reading full ebooks on my Pentium which were rendered as a single HTML file with zero lag.

> For chats, it is embarrassingly slow at rendering

To be fair, despite all the other ways that Slack runs rings around Teams, rendering speed isn’t one of them.

But, yeah, you’d think this would be an easy opportunity for a big win for Teams.

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

#313

Post by jFriedensreich »

might be good to add "for video conferencing", this actually might make sense as the horrible teams app can be closed outside of video calls and they still use slack for everything else. slacks video conferencing is seriously lacking in bad network conditions so slack even recommends using zoom there and zoom is very expensive at githubs scale. if they forced this on employees for team chat that would probably be reason to suspect the beginning of the end. i would certainly consider quitting over using teams for chat.

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

#314

Post by hackmiester »

wintogreen74 wrote: post #266
dragonwriter wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teams is minimally usable, but its pretty much worst-in-class for…everything it does. It’s two compelling selling points seem to be (1) that “nobody every got fired for buying IBM” now applies to Microsoft more than IBM, and (2) moreover, users don’t actually buy Teams qua Teams, they get a Microsoft 365 subscriptions for some of the things where Microsoft has not-worst-in-class solutions, and Teams comes along for t…

>> but its pretty much worst-in-class for…everything it does It has good outlook calendar integration; joining from a single click in my calendar view is much nicer than having to open the occurrence & find the zoom link.

But Zoom sends calendar invites that Google Workspace understands, so they automatically appear on my calendar and have this feature. And I don't even think either party did anything to facilitate it. It's just how iCalendar invites work.

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

#315

Post by ethbr0 »

wintogreen74 wrote: post #266
dragonwriter wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Teams is minimally usable, but its pretty much worst-in-class for…everything it does. It’s two compelling selling points seem to be (1) that “nobody every got fired for buying IBM” now applies to Microsoft more than IBM, and (2) moreover, users don’t actually buy Teams qua Teams, they get a Microsoft 365 subscriptions for some of the things where Microsoft has not-worst-in-class solutions, and Teams comes along for t…

>> but its pretty much worst-in-class for…everything it does It has good outlook calendar integration; joining from a single click in my calendar view is much nicer than having to open the occurrence & find the zoom link.

Ha! "Joining from a single click in my calendar view" has a 50/50 chance of working, seemingly dependant on if MS' SSO is correctly sync'd behind the scenes when I click.

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

#316

Post by [deleted] »

javier123454321 wrote: post #289
ygjb wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will be blunt. Teams is an awful user experience; I have been using online collaboration tools since the BBS days, and while I appreciate and understand why and what they are trying to build, it is bad software. Every single experience I have had as a teams user in professional settings, interacting with communities, and being required to use it for interactions with my childrens schools since the 2020 shutdowns ha…

I simply don't understand this at all. I've used in 3 of my last workplaces. Two exclusively and one in addition to slack. No particular complaints for having internal meetings of any size. I literally do not know what you are talking about and feel like I am missing something.

[deleted]

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

#317

Post by casenmgreen »

killjoywashere wrote: post #308

I don’t know much about Teams (we’re a Google Workspace/Meet shop) but I know they are selling all sorts of crazy access rights packages because any given Teams group I meet with, if they send the invite, it’s a different connection experience. You need an account. You need an account on their domain. You don’t need an account, but you need a guest account. You need your own account with Microsoft. You need a user na…

Yes.

I once tried to use Teams on Linux.

Eventually, I discovered buried in the package description text in Synaptic package manager that "this software only works with a corporate MS account".

This information could not be found on-line, the error messages were completely incorrect, there was negative on-line support - which is to say, there's a public forum MS run which has a bunch of confused people asking what the hell is going on (they were having my problem) and being given wrong answers by "I don't work for MS, I just help out here on this forum".

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

#318

Post by hackmiester »

xattt wrote: post #282
wvenable wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broken means "doesn't work". I've used Teams for 2 years now for conferencing, chat, desktop sharing, etc. It works just fine. I think a lot of Microsoft hate is clouding judgement here. People want Teams to suck.

My broken is fixing something all the time in order to get it to work correctly. Why does Teams occasionally load up with the usual icons showing the broken image icon? Why did my organization create a special “Fix Teams” utility?

My org does not use Teams at all. But I get invited to external Teams meetings sometimes.

As a result, Teams is on my computer, adds itself to the startup items, then opens up to a login window every time I turn on my computer. The X button does not work to close the window. I have to open Task Manager and kill it every time. I can disable it in startup items, but it puts itself back there, next time I join a Teams meeting.

Also, if I am using my computer in the closed position, it still chooses the integrated webcam and microphone every time, even sometimes switching to them randomly during a meeting.

Of course, I am running on an unusual setup that I'm sure Microsoft didn't think to test: I am running Microsoft Teams on Microsoft Windows 10 on a Microsoft Surface Pro computer.

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

#320

Post by kenjackson »

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.

We also use it every day.

That said, I feel like I know a lot of devs who think there are a lot of things that are unusable (or the equivalent). Everything from Visual Studio to the display on their iPhone to modern cinema and science fiction in general to In-and-Out burgers. As a general rule, I discount their take on pretty much anything.

Is Teams great? No. Its better than what I used before it though, and its probably gotten better faster than just about any other piece of software I've used. I struggle to generate any outrage at all about it one way or another.

Post reply on HN