|
|
|
|
|
|
by freehunter
2891 days ago
|
|
|
I agree completely, that's a terrible statement for an executive to make and PR should have stopped that. But on the other hand, I can almost see the logic in it. I'm making a huge leap here, but I remember back in the early 2000s, I had some friends who used AIM. I had some friends who used MSN. I had some friends who used ICQ. I had some friends who used Yahoo. These different chat services were really all exactly the same, the only difference is you can't chat between AIM and MSN. I don't care which chat service "wins", I just want all my friends using one so I don't have to sign into fifteen different services just to communicate. In that situation, Adium or Trillian or various third party clients were basically required if you had any sizable group of friends. Just standardizing on one chat platform would have been better than everyone making their own, since they weren't really competing to make anything better. They just existed, and all did exactly the same thing and were incompatible with each other. The question is, does Slack differ from Hipchat differ from Teams in any meaningful way, and does Hipchat disappearing actually make a difference when Slack exists? I honestly don't know the answer. |
|
|
If only the different services would be able to talk with each other, you wouldn’t have to get your friends to all switch to one of them. But, here we are, a decade or two later, and interoperability is still nonexistent.