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

641–650 of 725 posts

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

#641

Post by synecdoche »

lannisterstark wrote: post #636
javier123454321 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You should try searching for a message in teams, and then finding the context (not just one message before/after) of the message. It just doesn't do that lol.

I concur. It is truly awful. For what it's worth I use the features Save message and Pin if I think I might need to get back to it. But they are crutches for sure.

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

#642

Post by nortonham »

vineyardmike wrote: post #607
nl wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but Jitsi is terrible. For me, ranked: Zoom Google Meet Discord Slack Teams Anything else

> Jitsi is terrible. But it gets points for being open source and self hostable. I appreciate that. For me, it’s Google Meet (best UI, I like the waiting room, etc) Amazon Chime (I like the ringing features, integrated chat) Jitsi (OSS etc) Zoom (It’s ok, yes, but the company is questionable and the UI is so so) Etc Teams (never used tbh, but I used corporate Skype before rebranding and it never worked right)

zoom is a questionable company but somehow Google or Amazon are not.......

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

#643

Post by shaklee3 »

luckman212 wrote: post #584
generalk wrote: post #421

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 i…

It's boring reading comments like these. Really? 2.5 years of " nothing but poor experiences"? I have to ask: what the hell is wrong with your computer? I started using Teams heavily in 2020 and yes, back then it was unequivocally the worst of the bunch. But I've seen it make great strides, and it's been many months, perhaps years since I've really had any problems with it. Audio, video, screen sharing, PSTN dial-in,…

agreed. I use teams every day, and the meetings features are great. chat isn't as good, but it's useable. zoom is terrible and lacking basic features

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

#644

Post by YoshiRulz »

nl wrote: post #608
vineyardmike wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jitsi is terrible. But it gets points for being open source and self hostable. I appreciate that. For me, it’s Google Meet (best UI, I like the waiting room, etc) Amazon Chime (I like the ringing features, integrated chat) Jitsi (OSS etc) Zoom (It’s ok, yes, but the company is questionable and the UI is so so) Etc Teams (never used tbh, but I used corporate Skype before rebranding and it never worked right)

I'm too old to put up with software that doesn't work sorely because it is open source.

I'm too old to put up with software that doesn't work solely because it is closed-source and so doesn't accept patches :P Trying to get rid of the Discord client at the moment...

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

#645

Post by jacquesm »

bsder wrote: post #448
gcbirzan wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the second graphical API that Linux supports in 30 years, definitely Linux's problem.

The fact that screenshots and the security around them is still a flaming ball of garbage on Linux is not Teams' fault. The fact that Wayland still sucks after 15+ years is not Teams' fault. The fact that nobody unpaid want to work on X11, Wayland, and Linux GUI stuff is not Teams' fault.

That may well be true, but other providers of similar services seem to have this working just fine.

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

#646

Post by shaklee3 »

lannisterstark wrote: post #636
javier123454321 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You should try searching for a message in teams, and then finding the context (not just one message before/after) of the message. It just doesn't do that lol.

as opposed to zoom that doesn't even have a search?

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

#647

Post by onphonenow »

azalemeth wrote: post #551
generalk wrote: post #421

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 i…

If nothing else, Teams is horrendously inconsistent and one might naïvely think that MS would want to dogfood it better, with good statistics. This HN article now has nearly 600 comments of people – mostly – griping about Teams. A large number of them are replied to with people saying "Oh, it's never done that for me!" or, alternatively, "Teams never works fully, but at least X works" being replied to by "X has liter…

I was just on such a call and the chop in / out is so weird

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

#648

Post by raffraffraff »

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.

Multi-line code blocks are impossible on the Linux client. And Android (just confirmed). I have to use this feature about 10 times a day and triple backticks works about 1% of the time so you know what i do? I copy a multi-line code block from another chat and edit the text. Garbage.

I can add a code snippet but that thing is bloody awful. What's with the huge title over the snippet and truncating the text to a few lines even if it's only 2 lines longer? Gah.

Also, separating "chats" and "teams" into two places in the UI? Why? It's confusing. I occasionally click on the teams section and see a bunch of unread messages they I did't get notifications for.

I think. Because notifications are garbage. I'll be told that there's a message in a chat. Now I have to click on it and pray that it brings me to the right place. With slack the notification used to contain the sender and part of the message. Half the time I could eyeball the notification and get 100% of that i need without context switching.

Edit: my team is insisting on slack. We're ditching teams as a chat tool. Might keep it for video stuff but that depends how slack video conferencing works. (Used to use Zoom and Slack before)

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

#649

Post by 8note »

analog31 wrote: post #610
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's telling that Microsoft has to require folks to use Teams. Most people, when they get comfortable with something, are averse to change. Even if the thing they would change to is better than what they have , they still won't want to learn a new thing. Not saying that's the case here. But without real data to lead a decision, people just do what they prefer, rather than what's better. (I use both Slack and Teams…

People love change. Look how Google, Amazon, and social media took the world by storm. And pocket calculators, smart phones, large screen TV's, the list goes on. People like changes that benefit them. On the other hand, probably the #1 user request for enterprise software is: Please don't change anything. This tells you something about the software. Common reasons are: * The last major change broke everything and we…

For enterprise software, people don't like solving a problem twice. Responding to the change doesn't move forward current goals, so any change is bad -- the current problems have been mitigated, so even something that gets rid of the old problems at the expense of needing to to some work to integrate, with uncertainty about new problems is bad.

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

#650

Post by heleninboodler »

X-Istence wrote: post #568
heleninboodler wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the real reason people hate it with such a passion. It's just got so many baffling/annoying misfeatures that you could make lists about it endlessly. Have they changed the thing where you only see a circle with people's initials during meetings and you have to click on them to see their actual names? Edit: note that zoom has some equally-baffling and irritating design choices, but at least it performs well an…

> Have they changed the thing where you only see a circle with people's initials during meetings and you have to click on them to see their actual names? Nope.

This one is inexplicable. I don't know my coworkers by their initials, I know them by their names. I know it sounds like a simple mental mapping, but first off, it apparently isn't because I see initials and then I have to go mentally step through names to figure out who it could match, and second, I have multiple team members whose initials are JS, you fucking idiots. Is this like a fun puzzle to some people? I don't get it at all. There is room for the names. Just display the names.

In fact, if you really want to beat zoom, show me a nice compact list of people in the meeting, with their names, with a sound meter, with their mute status, sorted by who spoke most recently. Make this something I can see in my main meeting window, for a fairly large number of people (let's say at least 25) without paging through them. Let it go to multiple columns if necessary and I give it space. Do NOT do the zoom thing and make them all get really big so I can still only see 8.

Post reply on HN