Hacker News Reader

Comment by dijit | Hacker News Reader

> [..] and MS Teams are pretty good [..]

I will never work for any company that uses Teams as their internal communication tool again.

I'm done talking about "admins who set up groups wrong", or indicators that I'm holding it wrong...

I feel very strongly that Teams is a consequence of a company that doesn't care what it inflicts on workers, regardless of price.

The way teams shoves itself down my throat (we do not use teams at my current company and it was one of the reasons I moved here) is astonishing too[0].

So, no, Teams is not "pretty good".

[0]: https://blog.dijit.sh/teams-microsoft-monopoly

View on HN

I will also never work at a company that uses Teams as its primary form of communication. The whole ecosystem, along with SharePoint, is absolutely broken, end-to-end. Perhaps the worst user-facing software I've had the displeasure of using on a daily basis. I'm not kidding when I say that it a played a factor in me quitting.

Not a single time did we have a meeting on Teams that worked properly. Not once.

That’s a pretty crazy statement - I was typically on 4-5 meetings a day on Teams and it generally was pretty smooth for everyone. Including all hands with a lot of folks on. I thought their meeting software was easily the best part of an otherwise rickety app.

Guess that’s not everyone’s experience?

Meetings are smooth for me on Teams now after months of struggling but I still get near 100% CPU usage and my Macboook can't stay in a call for more than around an hour on battery. The UI is a confusing mess with too many things integrated into it. "Keep It Simple Stupid" needs to be more ingrained into Microsoft software. I do like the ability to raise hands and also the "meeting is ending in x minutes" notification however.

I would also consider joining a company in the future that doesn't use teams as a form of communication.

We moved from IBM Connections and WebEx to Sharepoint and Teams. I still think Teams is terrible software[1] but I’ve learned there’s definitely worse software out there.

[1]: the 100% CPU, the fan noise in the background of many peoples calls, the 500-2500ms lag between clicks and a screen update, the UX disaster of teams vs chats vs private channels, etc.

Amen brother. We had webex in my previous job and we needed to install a libpurple plug in for pidgin to make it work...just the chat. The video most of the times worked, but it required quite a lot of button clicking and was a separate web application .

Teams in comparison is heaven video and chat together... Wow. Of course it eats processing power like hungry, is slow and requires thrid party cookies.

I have to edit a lot of documents. Word appears to be an app, a web app and a thing in teams. None of them work the same and all have strange behaviour.

Try make a header or footer and edit it in one of the other apps MS offers.

Try edit or move an image.

Try work out how much text fits on a page.

It’s incredible how much market share teams has achieved with such poor functionality for basic tasks.

Couldn't agree more. Teams is terrible, but it's not so bad that it can't be used on an effective software team. The bigger problem with Teams is that it's indicative of a team who can't see the value in using something better.

I find that tools are usually something I can use to find and use information or capabilities, or some place information and capabilities can be placed if you don't want anyone to be able to find them.

My brief use of Teams (granted, like 3 years ago) put it firmly in the latter category. God that UI was a mess.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com