←back to thread

Slack has raised our charges by $195k per year

(skyfall.dev)
1502 points JustSkyfall | 5 comments | 18 Sep 25 01:37 UTC | HN request time: 1.045s | source
Show context
wpm ◴[18 Sep 25 02:03 UTC] No.45284156[source]▶
I can sympathize, but this was always the end deal for cloud SaaS apps. Give em a taste, get em hooked, get years of institutional knowledge and process embedded in the app, refuse to let them export it, and crank the price up.

It's not only guys named Larry who are lawnmowers. Don't stick your hand in. *Own* your shit. Be suspicious of anyone who tries to convince you not to. If it's "easy" it might come back to bite you.

Even if some self-hostable software stack does a rug pull and changes the license, you just don't have to update. You can go log into the database and export to whatever format you want.

replies(8): >>45284319 #>>45284486 #>>45284621 #>>45284645 #>>45284726 #>>45284734 #>>45284830 #>>45285638 #
onetimeusename ◴[18 Sep 25 02:34 UTC] No.45284486[source]▶
I had a job where everything was self hosted and some things custom made and the company abandoned it and moved everything to cloud providers. We had internal IRC and XMPP servers, internal accounting apps, wikis, etc. and moved it all. We paid substantially more money and our previous internal apps were actually better. The reasons given for this were kind of strange.

It was things like "internally hosted wikis were too hard to use for non-technical staff", "even though they work, the internal apps are old", "we want something that is standard", "we can't fall behind the other firms". The point about cloud provider apps all being familiar is valid but none of this stuff was that hard. It felt like the reason we switched (apart from persistent rumors about deals between sales teams) was because executives decided our internal apps lacked a cool factor. So good luck convincing non-technical executives that the cloud apps they are accustomed to seeing shouldn't be used.

replies(2): >>45284502 #>>45284592 #
1. calvinmorrison ◴[18 Sep 25 02:36 UTC] No.45284502[source]▶
"we want something that is standard".

Yeah? cool. Just get microsoft's cloud suite, its standard across non-cool companies.

Life is not worth living bikeshedding about chat apps.

replies(1): >>45284580 #
2. ant6n ◴[18 Sep 25 02:44 UTC] No.45284580[source]▶
We use Microsoft at our startup because it’s so cheap - 12$ for storage, chat, Video Call, Office, email.

Except the software is often pretty annoying. And even in 2025, MS will still randomly eat random files and the auto recovery still doesn’t work reliably.

replies(3): >>45284739 #>>45284908 #>>45286732 #
3. calvinmorrison ◴[18 Sep 25 03:01 UTC] No.45284739[source]▶
yeah its kind of annoying.

its not the amazing stack when i worked at $startup, but also we dont really spend any time futzing with it.

Microsoft releases a new feature, we get it. cool.

4. nine_k ◴[18 Sep 25 03:23 UTC] No.45284908[source]▶
Google Suite is $14 at the Standard level: 2 TB per user, email, custom domain, video calls, docs / sheets, etc. Approximately 15% more expensive, but, really, it's two dollars more expensive, and I'd say the quality is better.
5. netsharc ◴[18 Sep 25 07:40 UTC] No.45286732[source]▶
I was adding a calendar event on Teams (or was it "JS"-Outlook). I wanted to copy from another area in the app, but since it was a modal dialog, I couldn't. There's a button to pop up the "add event" dialog to be its own window. I clicked it, the add event window is now detached. But if course all the stuff I previously entered disappeared, what did I expect, that someone would bother to add code to prevent them from disappearing!?!