Hacker News Reader

Comment by duskwuff | Hacker News Reader

They didn't build it; they acquired the company that built it.

Oh, I'm interested in the business decision behind that. For example why didn't they just buy (not acquire) the slack product. What were the reasons to host it in-house and manage it themselves.

They got the team behind it, who now work on other parts of Dropobox

Right by why maintain the chat app? Why not just buy slack.

GOTO 10

Buying Slack requires Slack to be interested in selling themselves.

You're misinterpreting him. "Buy" here is purchasing the product, as a typical customer.

You're assuming:

* that Slack was for sale too

* that Dropbox wanted the app, rather than the people who made the app

I mean the slack product!

BradRuderman you are conflating two different things that are not necessarily related:

(1) How Dropbox chooses to satisfy internal requirements/demand for a group chat solution

(2) Why/whether Dropbox should have acquired/acqhired the Zulip team

Yea my point of the comment was (1). I didn't even know it was an acquisition. I am shutting up to prevent loosing any more minimal reputation.

Slack is out for a lot of groups that don't particularly want internal, private communications routed through a third-party.

I don't understand why you are being downvoted for legitimate questions.

Same. It's kind of sad. Apparently questioning the business reason behind decisions isn't appreciated. I personally find them interesting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com