Edit: for those who may think I’m overreacting to a small change in tooling, I offer this classic essay [1]. It explains the reasoning behind leaving much better than I could!
[1] https://steveblank.com/2009/12/21/the-elves-leave-middle-ear...
https://www.omglinux.com/the-official-microsoft-teams-app-fo...
https://office365itpros.com/2022/09/19/teams-pwa-linux-clien...
If you want an optimal teams experience download edge and run the webapp in it.
Others (and this is entirely valid in my opinion) see and notice and decide to ride it down all the way to the ground; this can be valuable also as a dying company is likely to promote anyone who remains; title inflation is a real thing.
Or another way to look at it - it's kinda extreme that a single straw would break a camel's back.
Note that it doesn't even have to be malicious at all; it's just a sign that the company is switching from the company you started working at to something else. Not everyone is up for that kind of change. Imagine the difference between working at the plucky startup trying to do X and working at any of the huge companies those startups can become.
Imagine if there was a company policy that made your office annoyingly uncomfortable after it was totally fine before. Is it extreme to consider other options?
At least the layoffs meant people got severances; this is walking for $0 and maybe the ability to find a different office productivity suite. I mean vote with your feet and all, but if this came up in an interview I'd probably laugh at you.
It’s the difference over picking up a recruiter call vs ignoring. Or spending 15 min to fix up a resume.
There are degrees before flipping a table and walking out. Forcing people to use teams when they are accustomed to better software pushes everyone marginally in that direction.