←back to thread

245 points rntn | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
wkat4242 ◴[] No.45167565[source]
The bigger issue is, if you're refusing to honour a contract as a vendor, not only do you risk a lawsuit like this one. But more importantly, who is ever going to sign up for another contract with you? You just proved it isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Unwritten terms like "valid until I decide to tear it up haha lol" are not generally appreciated by companies that depend on your stuff for their business. Of course you can extort your existing customers until they manage to move away but basically in the longer term you're suiciding your entire business.

replies(11): >>45167604 #>>45167610 #>>45167646 #>>45167690 #>>45167794 #>>45168811 #>>45168947 #>>45169373 #>>45170174 #>>45173303 #>>45173437 #
stego-tech ◴[] No.45167646[source]
This.

I had to tell CurrentCo that I cannot reinstall their vSphere deployment at a client site because they bought a perpetual license, didn’t migrate it to Broadcom before they cut it off, and now we cannot simply go get the latest patch or appliance for that version number without inviting an audit and a sueball from Broadcom.

“Good thing Microsoft would never do that to us.”

Ha. Hahaha.

replies(1): >>45167791 #
ocdtrekkie ◴[] No.45167791[source]
At least VMware isn't user-facing and it can be removed without riots. Imagine trying to tell someone they don't need Excel. I try to maintain at least plausible flexibility to go tell vendors to shove it, but if you have some enthusiastic fans of Microsoft Teams (they exist, who knew?)... Teams is one of those things that is inescapably tied to an incredibly deep well of platform lock-in.
replies(4): >>45167875 #>>45168508 #>>45168872 #>>45169025 #
snapplebobapple ◴[] No.45167875[source]
Really? Teams?? We went teams abd microsoft ecosystem fully because we needed extra windows management stuff as we have grown and users had software that required windows and excel and the biggest pain point has been teams. As near as i can tell it tries to do everythibg wrong and the things that are so blindingly obvious that it can't do them wrong, it finds a way to do them suboptimally
replies(2): >>45167910 #>>45168626 #
ocdtrekkie ◴[] No.45167910[source]
I would never invent a lie as implausible as this. Yes, there are fans of Microsoft Teams. They're out there and they make decisions.
replies(2): >>45168026 #>>45168461 #
CamelCaseName ◴[] No.45168026{4}[source]
I... I like Teams...
replies(3): >>45168128 #>>45170243 #>>45170752 #
dijit ◴[] No.45168128{5}[source]
So, in the spirit of intellectual curiousity, and I will avoid making any judgements in any of my responses, I have 5 questions:

1) Have you ever been exposed to alternative communicators?

2) What features do you enjoy about teams

3) What platform are you using it from (Windows Desktop / Laptop? What spec)

4) Have you ever written a bot or integration?

5) Can you take me through a very brief working day for you, with a focus on collaborating with others.. (file sharing, online chats, IRL chats, meetings?)

replies(2): >>45168445 #>>45170139 #
axus ◴[] No.45168445{6}[source]
I'll give my own interpretation. Not that I love Teams, but the alternative in a dinosaur corporation is basically email.

1) WebEx and the open source chat that Oracle appropriated. Fortunately Zoom came and went too quickly.

2) Searching the Exchange corporate directory. BASIC features: status, embedding pictures, attaching files that Outlook would block. Sharing links that aren't obfuscated.

3) Can you even run Teams from Apple / Linux?

4) Ha! Imagine the nightmares for the person linking Atlassian and Teams.

5) Group texts, file shares, voice calls, recorded meetings. Meetings with groups from other companies is almost painless.

replies(4): >>45168645 #>>45168659 #>>45169832 #>>45171951 #
1. inetknght ◴[] No.45169832{7}[source]
> Fortunately Zoom came and went too quickly.

I've used both Teams and Zoom (and others). Honestly, I'd rather use Zoom instead of Teams.

> BASIC features: status, embedding pictures, attaching files that Outlook would block. Sharing links that aren't obfuscated.

Status is settable by just about any competitor to Teams. Slack and Zoom both can set your current status.

Embedding pictures and files is also not unique to Teams.

Obfuscated links? Just a matter of time before Microsoft changes that to some microsoft link for a "vulnerability scanner" and then charges the company for the privilege to block random things it doesn't understand how to scan.

> Can you even run Teams from Apple / Linux?

Yes / technically yes (not supported any more)

> Group texts, file shares, voice calls, recorded meetings. Meetings with groups from other companies is almost painless.

Slack and Zoom are better at all of these.

replies(2): >>45172634 #>>45173673 #
2. dctoedt ◴[] No.45172634[source]
Zoom FTW, big-time.
3. dijit ◴[] No.45173673[source]
I wouldn’t say Zoom is better to be honest with you, for just meetings the UX of Teams is pretty bad but the UX of Zoom is almost as bad; there’s not much in it.

Last time I checked Zoom was a pig on resources and required a weird background worker- and you couldn't even send files.