Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

711–720 of 725 posts

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

#711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

True, Teams isn't as awful as it was in 2020. But it's still pretty bad, and it's a bad that is foisted on many of us. That makes putting up with it even more irritating than it might otherwise be.

I've been using teams since about 2020 and I don't think they've fixed any annoyance or bug I've encountered.

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

#712
post #544
post #11

Somewhat ironic that a company that’s entire existence was based on the idea of giving developers great tools no longer values giving its own developers great tools. Only a matter of time before this new attitude towards developers shows up in the product.

Considering GitHub is the reason teams is so bad (electron) I say welcome your hens home to roost.

Most terrible, shitty electron apps I've suffered through were orders of magnitudes more pleasant to use than teams. Teams seems to be actively A/B testing new ways to be a terrible experience.

It's not just electron, there's some kind of Heisenbug-driven-design going on in the backrooms of Microsoft.

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

#713

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.

> It just doesn't do that lol.

This is wrong, it works 33% of the time.

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

#714
post #562

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…

> It's also damning that the list of things I hate about it hasn't changed in the three years I've been using it heavily Honestly, I'll take a program with a bunch of consistent downsides over one that has fewer downsides but comes up with new ones in each version.

Teams is so bad in weird inconsistent ways it feels they A/B downsides and bugs instead of features.

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

#715
post #654
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Not intuitive at all but there is "ctr+shift+v" for pasting only text

That's actually the paradigm most programs use for "paste without formatting" which teams is the only program I can think of that doesn't support it.

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

#716

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…

I think the biggest problem with Teams is the leadership's strategy. They seem to be focusing on adding as many glossy features as quickly as possible. The quality, performance and consistency doesn't seem to be a point of consideration at all. Yet for a user who spends a lot of time in it each day, I really don't care about animated waves on top of my video, or this together mode. I just want it to work and not take…

I recently tried edge to use the new Bing and I feel the same way. So many features, half of them buggy, and zero coherence throughout the app. (That said, few outright bugs although I assume I mostly have google to thank for that.) Not sure what it is about MS and features features features.

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

#717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people who are not solely at one company - contractors/freelancers who perhaps need to support connectivity with multiple organizations - MS Teams is a huge hostile pita. I had 2 clients each using Teams, and I was working with each. But... I can't just be 'logged in' to two different Teams organizations. If I was in company A, I couldn't see anything from company B. Apparently you can do this in the phone app, b…

The best solution I've found to connecting to multiple client orgs in Teams at a time is to use it exclusively in the browser, and use a new Chrome profile for each client to keep things separated and working. I don't use the local Teams client.

I use the local Team for my employer organization and log in browser Teams for clients organization. Still, notifications are unreliable across organizations

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

#718

How is it possible that Teams is still such a poor product? I really didn't like it when my job switched like 6 years ago, and I don't recall ever feeling that it improved in any meaningful way. I switched jobs to one using Slack and it's not perfect but it is a lot better. It's almost a meme at this point. In the presence of other clients that have gotten it "right" (or at least more "right" than teams) like Slack,…

Teams was introduced less than 6 years ago ;)

I was estimating - I guess my point was that they started using it right around the time it started replacing Skype for Business.

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

#719
post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, thank you so much for putting the experience into words. The random errors are just so... astoundingly random. I've had problems with a headset on USB-C (Sennheiser EPOS). Teams would connect once, and then never again. Another time it would stop responding to any click. Then it would reload whenever changing team/channel. And then it would no longer show any notifications. I haven't seen an app with that am…

Yah Bethesda game is fitting. For me it’s the text formatting. Why can’t I express a pretty table unless pasting it from xls? Why code blocks are useless and unreadable. And how HOW do I exit a quoteblock if the quote reach the last line. ( I now always type a character on the last line before starting a block quote ) Call themselves are fine, not great, but damn. Writing text is reminding of text formatting in early…

Hitting enter two times gets you out of code blocks. It's the only consistent method I have found.

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

#720
post #634
post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my Big Company (400,000+ employees) it is not permitted to use other systems to host meeting without authorization. Using unapproved software is strictly not allowed. There can be plenty of reasons including business data security, legal data retention, international data privacy laws, licensing agreements, etc. I remember when Skype was considered controversial because indication of working status and access to e…

400,000+? I don't mean to question this but that's a crazy high number assuming it's not Amazon or Walmart.

Globally there are many large companies of this size.
Post reply on HN