[offtop5]

Not exactly. The Twitter brand isn't looking so hot right now.

I think it's the same thing with Slack, Slack only exists because Microsoft teams is made by Microsoft.

I swear to God it's mostly a placebo effect, but you're like oh yeah we're using slack we're the cool kids now. Many companies will have a single breakaway team that uses slack just to feel cool.

But if $10 a month makes a developer happier she might produce another $500 in value.

[ajford]

We use both Slack and Teams. I strongly disagree that it's the 'cool factor' making Slack better. Teams is just a pain to use for 70% of my day-to-day messaging needs. Teams works well for meetings and large presentations. For intra-team communication and bot integration, Slack wins hands down for my team.

[offtop5]

Teams works.

Your team is just used to Slack.

At the same time , if it costs 2k in lost productivity to switch, it's easier to keep using Slack.

I agree Slack is better though. I can't imagine if I started a new team I'd fight for slack over teams though

[nwsm]

> The Twitter brand isn't looking so hot right now.

Can you explain? I use Twitter daily (hourly) and haven't read anything that lessened my opinion of them. Are you talking about censorship / Trump stuff? Personally they have not gotten on my bad side with any of that.

> Slack only exists because Microsoft teams is made by Microsoft

I'm also not sure what you mean by this. Microsoft Teams exists because of Slack.

[pembrook]

> The Twitter brand isn't looking so hot right now.

I see "current press sentiment" as an irrelevant factor. Just wait until some prominent right winger heads to Substack and the journalists start aiming their sights.

The point is, if I'm going to start a paid newsletter, am I willing to give up an extra 5% of my income for the same feature set?

The answer is hell no. Substack will have to lower their prices, and then the feature war will begin. Twitter will always have the upper hand given they can directly integrate newsletter sign up forms into twitter.

But hey, bureaucratic incompetence is endemic at Twitter, so they might screw up this obvious path to victory they have in front of them.

[offtop5]

To each their own, but given the major questions around how much power Twitter has, I don't see a lot of free and open journalism happening there.

Ideally the entire reason you pay for this type of content is because you don't want to just read CNN. If Twitter is perceived as controlling your content anyway, why pay for it

[heimatau]

IMHO, the only solution is a fairly complicated decentralized structure with economic incentives for all.

[offtop5]

Even then you have gatekeepers for hosting and payment processing.

[ajvs]

Exactly the problem cryptocurrency was created to address.