Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Foreign hackers breached a US nuclear weapons plant via SharePoint flaws

    (www.csoonline.com)
    433 points zdw | 14 comments | 21 Oct 25 15:51 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
    Show context
    crmd ◴[21 Oct 25 19:41 UTC] No.45660666[source]▶
    One of the first things I do after getting an inquiry from a recruiter or friend referral is lookup the MX record for the company’s email domain. It is an anonymous one-command check to see if they’re a Microsoft shop.

    If they are, it’s enormous personal red flag. MSFT is very popular so I’m only speaking about my own experience, but I have learned over the course of 20 years that an MSFT IT stack is highly correlated with me hating the engineering culture of an organization.

    I know I am excluding a lot of companies with great engineering culture where I would thrive and who just happen to use Outlook/Sharepoint/Teams, etc. but it has had such better predictive power of rotten tech culture than any line of questioning I have come up with during interviews that I still use it.

    I don’t mean any disrespect to MSFT-centric engineers out there - it’s not you it’s me.

    replies(11): >>45660852 #>>45660872 #>>45661217 #>>45661616 #>>45662254 #>>45662313 #>>45662719 #>>45663474 #>>45663495 #>>45665083 #>>45675213 #
    fujigawa ◴[21 Oct 25 20:24 UTC] No.45661217[source]▶
    I'm gonna be honest, you sound like a problem employee.

    The companies not using Microsoft, are using Google. Which in my experience is equally or measurably worse.

    Just personal data points, but every avowed Microsoft hater I've ever worked with has been... difficult. Like a-drag-on-the-team-because-he-refuses-to-use-company-tools difficult.

    Edit: How does an aged post on this site go from +4 to -1 in the span of a few minutes?

    replies(19): >>45661276 #>>45661318 #>>45661625 #>>45661903 #>>45661968 #>>45662387 #>>45662494 #>>45663148 #>>45663393 #>>45663463 #>>45664329 #>>45664878 #>>45666991 #>>45667600 #>>45667845 #>>45669168 #>>45669404 #>>45671057 #>>45672125 #
    Etheryte ◴[21 Oct 25 20:29 UTC] No.45661276[source]▶
    I don't know man, you're gonna have a very tough crowd if you're gonna try and convince anyone that Teams is as good as Google Meet.
    replies(1): >>45661327 #
    1. fujigawa ◴[21 Oct 25 20:33 UTC] No.45661327[source]▶
    They are all equally crap. I'm convinced the people designing collaboration tools don't have to use them on a daily basis.
    replies(5): >>45661410 #>>45661596 #>>45664124 #>>45665323 #>>45668062 #
    2. dieortin ◴[21 Oct 25 20:40 UTC] No.45661410[source]▶
    I’m sure the people who designed Teams and Meet use their own products on a daily basis. And if those are crap, what’s a better alternative?
    replies(3): >>45662526 #>>45663032 #>>45665406 #
    3. supportengineer ◴[21 Oct 25 20:56 UTC] No.45661596[source]▶
    The plague that is currently infesting our software industry is "Promo-Driven Culture". Employees are incentivized to get a promotion, not to make life better for anyone, except for their manager's promotion.
    4. NeutralCrane ◴[21 Oct 25 22:26 UTC] No.45662526[source]▶
    Zoom + Slack
    5. zelphirkalt ◴[21 Oct 25 23:20 UTC] No.45663032[source]▶
    It is funny, that even a Slack Huddle, something that's not even the core of Slack's function, is better than anything one gets with MS Teams. MS Teams is so laughably bad, I think I have never used a worse chat/voice chat/video chat program. Probably not even Skype in its single core days was worse, even though it ate one third of my single core CPU, just to have a call back then.
    replies(2): >>45666220 #>>45675807 #
    6. nicoburns ◴[22 Oct 25 01:59 UTC] No.45664124[source]▶
    IME the call quality varies quite widely between video calling software. And being able to reliably hear and be heard with reasonable latency is pretty important!
    7. dijit ◴[22 Oct 25 05:53 UTC] No.45665323[source]▶
    Equally?

    Definitely not.

    Maybe it can be argued that it depends on how you use it, but meet is so far and away better for video calls and screen sharing, its not even funny.

    Jitsi is also an incredible improvement, and it is self hostable and free.

    Teams is likely the worst software that a company will force on all its employees- with that in mind, I guess some people can get stockholm syndrome? Some people who only jump from MSFT shops literally don’t know that there’s anything better. They went from Communicator to Lync to Skype for Business and now to Teams- and Teams is better than those just about.

    replies(1): >>45667477 #
    8. Lio ◴[22 Oct 25 06:11 UTC] No.45665406[source]▶
    Do they? Didn’t Microsoft force all its employees back to the office?

    That doesn’t sound like they have faith in Teams themselves.

    I use Teams every day and it can’t even do threading in channels properly. The spellchecker is unreliable and even copy and paste is occasionally patchy.

    It is not a good product. I’d switch to Slack given the choice.

    replies(1): >>45668048 #
    9. cc81 ◴[22 Oct 25 08:22 UTC] No.45666220{3}[source]▶
    What is it that is bad about it these days?
    10. qwertytyyuu ◴[22 Oct 25 11:26 UTC] No.45667477[source]▶
    It seems you have had the fortune to not have had to suffered through jabber
    replies(1): >>45667549 #
    11. dijit ◴[22 Oct 25 11:35 UTC] No.45667549{3}[source]▶
    Oh, I did… I quite liked it actually. :)
    12. alternatex ◴[22 Oct 25 12:30 UTC] No.45668048{3}[source]▶
    Teams is used in the Teams org that develops it in Microsoft yes. Source: I work on Teams free/consumer.

    Not to say that the developers working on it are satisfied with it..

    13. alternatex ◴[22 Oct 25 12:31 UTC] No.45668062[source]▶
    When it comes to Teams, unfortunately we do. It's actually used across Microsoft in general. A company of this size requires Teams even if just for the sake of keeping up with security and compliance.
    14. Etheryte ◴[22 Oct 25 22:11 UTC] No.45675807{3}[source]▶
    In the early Skype days, that tradeoff made sense. Internet speeds across the globe were far from fast so they spent more CPU cycles on compression so they could save on bandwidth.