• GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    When something is both universally hated and almost always chosen above less hated competitors, that’s usually a sign that there’s some kind of market failure. Maybe it’s anticompetitive conduct by the provider (like Microsoft using its market power on Outlook/Exchange to push other services like Teams over its competition), or a principal-agent problem (like the person paying for Teams not actually having to live with most of the shittiness).

    • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      They bundle teams with o365. The cost to integrate another messaging client is more than simply adding Teams to your already expensive bundle.

      • shylosx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s as simple as this really. It’s included therefore a subscribing company can just not renew a slack, Zoom, or whatever contract and say “hey we saved money”

    • nixcamic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      And also all of their competition also kinda sucks. So like, Teams is worse enough that if you’re using it every day you’ll hate it but not worse enough that if you use it once or twice you’ll notice.

    • havocpants@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Maybe it’s anticompetitive conduct by the provider (like Microsoft using its market power on Outlook/Exchange to push other services like Teams over its competition)

      That’s exactly what it is. They leveraged their dominance/monopoly in one market to gain a stranglehold on another market. It’s not exactly a new tactic for Microsoft either.