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

421–430 of 725 posts

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

#421

Post by generalk »

Regardless of what you think of Teams -- I myself have had nothing but poor experiences over 2.5 years of using it daily -- it's telling that Microsoft has to require folks to use Teams.

I'm sure this is just Microsoft unifying everyone on the same comms platform, but seriously, I don't know anyone who chooses Teams.

I know non-tech folks who chose Outlook 365 because of familiarity and then end up on Teams because it's free, but there's a difference between "I chose an email/identity platform that I know and I guess I'll use its chat app too" and "I evaluated team chat offerings and Teams is our top pick."

Hell, at my most recent company (which was founded on O365 before I arrived) I replaced Teams chat interface with self-hosted Mattermost (Slack's HIPAA-compliant tier is way too expensive for a startup) and it was roundly loved. We did still lean on Teams for its video chat, because most of our non-tech staff know how to schedule and join video meetings, but even then the top complaint I got was from folks on Windows laptops whose Teams plugin for Outlook somehow got corrupted (or something?) and suddenly Outlook's Teams integration was gone.

Just an awful product all around -- said with no offense meant to the team building it.

_Update_: I now notice the text "for the sole purpose of video conferencing" which lines up with my use case, but still -- of all the video apps I put Teams down with Webex as "bottom of the barrel choices" due to the constant performance and functionality issues.

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

#423

Post by hulitu »

giantrobot wrote: post #329
wvenable wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If I get a message on Teams and bring the window forward, the text box isn't active so if I start typing a reply nothing happens. Now I need to use the cursor to select the box. So fuck me if I tab to Teams to reply to a message. When joining a video/audio meeting, even though the "Join" button is colored like it's active, hitting enter will pull up some part of the audio or video config instead of joining the meetin…

Welcome to the new UX/UI/Web x.0 whatever.

Why, in the name of ... , when only 1 (one) input field is displayed on the screen, why it is not active ? 20 years ago this was the standard. What happened ?

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

#424

Post by b112 »

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…

Seriously, it is incomprehensible that Microsoft would ship something so utterly broken

It has to be said, what on earth do you mean?! This is Microsoft, they are famous for broken.

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

#425

Post by freeqaz »

prmoustache wrote: post #407
freeqaz wrote: post #380

Teams for Linux, when I inspect it with htop, is actually running a process called "Skype" in the background. I think that explains some of the crappiness of the UX! (It has required some serious hacking to make it even functional for me.) Since then my team has swapped to using Discord for what we're doing. It sounds a bit weird to use a Gamer tool at work but it's actually been pretty great since we run an Open Sou…

I find it strange to associate open source and discord. I tend to dismiss any open source project that uses it.

I'm excited for Linen[0] to potentially replace Discord for our use case because unfortunately it doesn't feel like there is another tool that we could use besides Discord or Slack. (We were on Slack for a long time but we just couldn't get people to use it, and we've had a lot more success building a community since swapping to Discord.)

What other tools do you recommend for Open Source communities to use?

0: https://www.linen.dev/ (They are going to be adding a 2-way sync soon that lets you post messages from the web into Slack, Discord, and even GitHub Discussions, so you can basically pick any platform and it doesn't matter. Kind of like the old IRC days!)

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

#426

Post by dghlsakjg »

wvenable wrote: post #237
xattt wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your definition of broken is likely different than the GP.

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.

I actually like a lot of microsoft products, even though I own several thousand dollars worth of Apple hardware.

I happily use windows 10 for most personal computing (I haven't upgraded, so no comment on 11), VScode, github, word, excel, whatever...

Teams, though, is one MS product that genuinely never worked for me. Last company I was at used it, and they had to upgrade my work machine since teams needed more CPU (old machine was an i5 macbook with 8gb). Google/zoom was fine, but running teams would regularly overheat my computer.

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

#427

Post by e40 »

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've used Teams, Zoom and Meet. Teams is, by far, the worst options. I cringe every time I have to use it, because it's random whether I or one of my colleagues will not waste minutes at the start of the meeting getting something to work, or just joining.

You see, MS has completely messed up the login for Teams. I have like 3 different MS accounts (Azure, Office365, etc). Some of my coworkers have many more than that, due to identities they use for contracts. I've tried Chrome, Edge, Firefox, etc. I've tried incognito windows. Sometimes it just doesn't work.

Never had a single problem with Zoom or Meet, other than the default audio devices not being selected. That's easily fixed.

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

#428

Post by roncesvalles »

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.

If you're a company of 10 or 20 people, you won't notice the problems. It starts to break at medium-sized business scale (anything over, say, 100 employees). You start to notice limitations in the UI/UX but also just constant bugs in calling functionality, split meetings, super laggy large meetings, slow navigation, and broken search.

It just feels like it wasn't built for serious scale from the ground up, like some after-thought Todo List app that was thrown in with Office 365 to tick a checkbox.

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

#429

Post by jorams »

bombcar wrote: post #34
williamstein wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How might they do that given that Microsoft now owns all of the IP and GitHub is mostly closed source? It seems like a very different situation than the liberally open source MySQL.

The problem is that what GitHub does is relatively reproducible (Gitlab, gitea, bitbucket? others do it) but the value GitHub provides is free hosting for so much content. Anyone can make an image hosting site, making one profitable long term is always the problem. For now, GitHub is winning because of the free side of their toolset.

GitHub was a profitable bootstrapped business for 4 years before they decided to take a 100 million dollar investment and start bleeding money in pursuit of growth. Sourcehut is a profitable business even without requiring payment yet. The business model is not the problem. Network effects are.

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

#430

Post by hulitu »

phpisthebest wrote: post #244
xattt wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your definition of broken is likely different than the GP.

Pretty sure the GP definition of broke is not really what broke means. I know it is all the rage these days to just redefine terms to make them often mean the exact opposite of what the rest of the planet understands them to mean But we have to have shared definitions for words or communications just breaks down It can not be "your definition of broke is different from mine" if that is the case then language is just…

I had to restart Windows because Teams will not join meetings. If that is not broken than what ? (killing it with process explorer did not help)
Post reply on HN