Microsoft's Jeff Teper: Teams 'Will Be Even Bigger Than Windows' 105
An anonymous reader writes: Jeff Teper, CVP for Microsoft 365, has a vision for the company's Office 365 chat-based collaboration tool that competes with Slack, Facebook's Workplace, and Google Chat. In terms of reach, Teper wants Microsoft Teams to eclipse Windows. (Windows 10 runs on over 1 billion monthly active devices.)
Our interview took place a day after Microsoft concluded its online-only Build 2020 developer conference, where the company gave business developers new tools to build Teams apps. Microsoft launched a Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code extension for Teams in preview, introduced new integrations between its Power Platform and Teams, and announced a custom app submission process to help IT admins. Teper was happy to cover a range of Teams topics, including metrics, growth, competitors, consumer positioning, machine learning, and of course dealing with the increased demand during the coronavirus pandemic.
Our interview took place a day after Microsoft concluded its online-only Build 2020 developer conference, where the company gave business developers new tools to build Teams apps. Microsoft launched a Visual Studio and Visual Studio Code extension for Teams in preview, introduced new integrations between its Power Platform and Teams, and announced a custom app submission process to help IT admins. Teper was happy to cover a range of Teams topics, including metrics, growth, competitors, consumer positioning, machine learning, and of course dealing with the increased demand during the coronavirus pandemic.
Umm, no (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
And how is that different from the competing products? You have to view this from Microsoft's perspective which is from the point of view of business users. What you call random ideas are things they see as necessary for online collaboration.
Are those tools well integrated and correctly separated from each other? Not by a long shot. Hopefully they'll fix things along the way soon rather than years from now.
But at least you don't need to be using Windows to use Office 365 or Teams, which is a weird departure
Re: Umm, no (Score:1)
Re: Umm, no (Score:5, Funny)
I'm waiting for 3.11, so I can know it is designed for workgroups.
Re: (Score:2)
In Teams 3.11 they will introduce the ability to look at more than one thing at a time. Ironically, yes then it would actually be designed for work.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I was pretty happy with Skype then Skype for Business. Teams just isn't friendly. We did a forced migration recently to Teams from S4B among our 70k users. It is "mostly harmless".
Re: Umm, no (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>What you call random ideas are things they see as necessary for online collaboration.
Arhhh, I see. Just like when Bill Gates said the Internet was crap and MSN was going to be brilliant
Bill may have held self-serving delusions about his own products, but he wasn't wrong about the large steaming pile of fucking humanity we call the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
>What you call random ideas are things they see as necessary for online collaboration.
Arhhh, I see. Just like when Bill Gates said the Internet was crap and MSN was going to be brilliant
Bill may have held self-serving delusions about his own products, but he wasn't wrong about the large steaming pile of fucking humanity we call the internet.
You're wrong. Gates didn't care if the Internet would turn out to be a "large steaming pile of fucking humanity"; he just didn't think it was going be something he could make a lot of money from. Here's a quote: [inc.com] "There were only a few hundred million dollars done in transactions in the Internet last year. If it is taking over, that is a pretty small number," he told the Times. "Put newspapers and magazines out of business? It will never happen," he says, adding: "People say the Internet will replace stores.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
"The internet is crap, and we're the chief purveyor of crap, so we gotta get into this business now!"; Bill Gates, possibly in an alternate universe.
Re:Umm, no (Score:4, Insightful)
Teams competes with Microsoft's existing offerings. Ie, the team collaboration is just OneNote and Sharepoint. The calendar is Outlook. The chat and video meetings and phone calls are Skype for Business. The add-on "apps" is iffy, but Sharepoint and Azure DevOps have the same hopeful feel that enterprises will be dumb enough to buy stuff from a web store (and MS is probably right). The only thing in Teams that is not elsewhere is the "Teams" button which really is just wiki and sharepoint and posting anyway, so it's nothing new or unique.
The whole damn thing feels like another Microsoft "me too!" offering, where they feel bad if they're not an industry leader in a certain area they have little competence in.
Re: (Score:2)
So, in other words, it's now like most of the products in the Microsoft Office suite?
Re: (Score:2)
Teams sucks BALLS. It's like they threw a bunch of random ideas in a raffle bowl and instead of shaking the bowl and picking a few, they took a glue stick and adhered all the ideas to a beach ball that they're tossing at customers.
False. You can see multiple glued ideas on a beachball at once, whereas Teams doesn't even allow you to multitask.
Why is this marked funny? (Score:2)
This is all simply true.
I don't see how (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: I don't see how (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Skype just get broken more and more every years... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Microsoft would rather create new crap from scratch because it's more fun than fixing the broken crap people are actually using? There's nothing inherently wrong with Skype for Business that can't be fixed or added for less than the cost it took to develop Teams.
Re:I don't see how (Score:4, Informative)
Too many ways to split text chats into groups of people and teams of people. If you use Teams, you'll know what I mean. It's hard to keep track of which conversations are happening in which sections. Also, what they call "Wiki" I call "weak notepad". They basically have all the parts, but they're just all over the place and not powerful enough.
But since this is Microsoft, we know we only need to wait until they fix it. Unlike Google, who would cancel the project in a year or two and try to replace it with something similar yet completely different.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that kills it for me is the half-assed threading. It's like marketing said 'you must have threaded chats' and dev team says 'if I have to, fine *technically* it is a threaded chat and it'll be fine so long as no one ever uses it'.
Either ditch the threaded conversation concept or if you must have the option to 'convert to conversation' as a child of a channel and dedicate a mode of interaction to that conversation, instead of using the scrollbar as your means of swapping between them and never know
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Team chats is the least used part of Teams for me (not the IM part, the "Posts" part).
We only need to wait for Microsoft to fix Skype for Business also, but I think that will be a long wait. Chances are they are copying the Google model these days, this is most definitely not the same team that created Windows or Office. Though they still are at their old game of playing Internet catch-upl
Re: (Score:2)
The set of emoticons, gifs, stickers, etc just gives it a consumer social media feel to the whole thing, making it feel like less of a product for professionals.
I know people hate Skype for Business, and it has some flaws. But why not FIX those flaws instead of dumping it all out and starting over with this extremely weird and difficult to classify app? It's like there's a battle in Redmond between the VPs and whoever wins the drinking contest on Fridays gets their favorite app funded.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the big things that sucks about it is that if you want to scroll up and see the history it's....so....damn....slow....for....no....apparent....reason. Yes, maybe excusable if everyone on the team posts keesp posting memes in the chat, but it's the same story when it's plain old text.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a Microsoft product. So it will be installed by corporations who worship Microsoft and make sure they buy only Microsoft products. They don't care if these products help you out, the VP of IT has spoken and so it shall be done.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It worked perfectly on the first try.
...for some values of "worked", "perfectly", and "try".
Re: (Score:2)
Outside of Enterprise Office users who have had it installed it by default, does anyone actually go out of their way to install it?
No, and that's the thing, Teams' popularity rests entirely on the MS ecosystem integration, synchronisation with Skype for Business, built on Office 365 groups, using Sharepoint to store files, embedded basically every office app within itself.
It's a good idea, horribly executed, excruciating to use, yet brilliantly marketed to the CTO.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Slack is simply that it costs more, whilst being a lower quality product.
That is a matter of opinion.
So it's not that Slack is inherently bad, it's just that there's no point in it. It's just a more expense less good version of Teams. Teams just has better audio support, better integrations and so on.
Again your opinion. My opinion is that Teams is a terrible copy of Slack. Slack was meant for messaging; it's not a replacement for WebEx or Zoom. Here's the problem with Teams: it wants to be everything while not being very good at one thing.
I've seen it before, but mostly it's down to Slack being in the game before Teams, and once people are on it they can't be bothered to change,
And before then we had Messenger, Lync?, etc. Teams is just the latest iteration of MS messaging that no one really uses.
which is fine, but any new rollout or objective evaluation has literally no reason to go with Slack, it's just Teams but worse, and more expensive. Why pay for external integrations when you can have them all for free with Teams?
Your main assumption is that people who use Slack care about all those external integrations. Also your assumption is
yea - nope (Score:1)
Here we go again. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Here we go again. (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect he didn't know better and just grabbed some random weeds that were in his yard.
Easy peasy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't read "You're welcome xyz" without thinking about Deadpool shooting Ryan Reynold in the back of the head.
Also, was that murder or suicide?
Re: (Score:2)
I can't read "You're welcome xyz" without thinking about Deadpool shooting Ryan Reynold in the back of the head.
Also, was that murder or suicide?
Yes!
That whole sequence of cleanups was one of the best post scenes to come along in a long, LONG time.
Lol, no (Score:1)
A surge isn't a trend. (Score:4, Insightful)
With Covid-19 having a lot of employees working from home where they use to be all at the office. Teams was picked because it was available, as most businesses had Office 365 already available. Making it a low hanging fruit to solve a problem that has shot up.
Once things settle down, while I expect there will be a lot more Work from Home people then before, for the long run. Many will go back to their offices, by choice. As well a lot of companies may demand that their employees return to the office.
So in the long term the following will happen.
Teams will be reevaluated to see if there is a better solution, for the remote workers when there is enough time to do a proper product evaluation.
Less people will be needing the tool.
So this surge that Microsoft sees, will probably be a blip, and perhaps recover at a new normal level (probably a bit higher than before)
Re: (Score:1)
I think a lot more places initially chose Zoom because it was readily available and very easy to use. My employer, at least, quickly switched to Microsoft Teams because the security was better. No, that's not a joke. And while I do expect remote meetings are going to be less important in the future than they've been during the pandemic, I expect most people to want the ability to have them, even if they don't us
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The good thing about working from home is that you can replace your coffee breaks by "stimulating audio-visual breaks". It's also a good cardio-vascular exercise!
Re: (Score:2)
There is never enough time to spend time on something that you can't directly bill a client for.
Re: (Score:1)
Companies ate up with Microsoft everything will continue to use teams, and its use in some circumstances will be durable.
It is a more usable interface for both sharepoint and skype (or just has better technology developed since clearly they picked teams as their horse to ride some time ago).
My company started off saying everyone had to move to sharepoint for all file saving, and that didn't happen since it just wasn't workable. Now they are saying move to teams, and that does seem to be happening since it d
Re: (Score:2)
With Covid-19 having a lot of employees working from home where they use to be all at the office. Teams was picked because it was available, as most businesses had Office 365 already available. Making it a low hanging fruit to solve a problem that has shot up.
Don't attribute to a random event what actually has an underlying business need. Sure COVID saw an increase in videoconferencing apps, but they could have been any app. The "surge" started last year already. Slashdot even ran stories about it before COVID 19 was a thing, here from back in November: https://slashdot.org/story/19/... [slashdot.org]
The reality is, the rise of Teams is taking over the decline in Skype for Business in existing Microsoft shops as MS put a lifecycle notice out on Skype for Business last year.
Teams will be reevaluated to see if there is a better solution
No
Re: (Score:3)
Funny to see all these high tech companies talking about chat when we had AOL Instant Messenger about 25 years ago.
Real bleeding edge stuff!!!!
Let's not forget ICQ. Which was way better than AIM.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not forget IRC, which was way better than ICQ.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not forget post-it notes stuck to the boss's door!
Re: (Score:2)
Let's not forget Latin inscriptions engraved in the front facade of temples!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: What about Aol AIM???? (Score:1)
My company still has a few teams using IRC and more using Jabber.
Re: (Score:2)
I liked how for months MSN Messenger could connect to AIM and Eh Oh Hell's staff couldn't stop them. They had to rewrite a big chunk of the app to add authentication and remove the great gaping security holes to finally shut them out.
Re: (Score:2)
The New Internet Explorer (Score:2)
And... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That won't happen. Remember, nobody will ever need more than 640GB!
Re: (Score:2)
I was looking for someone to make this joke.
Teams is an Electron app, which means bloat. Microsoft lists Teams as requiring 3 GB (!!) of disk space (source: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-... [microsoft.com] ), which means that Teams is actually already bigger than Windows XP.
75 mllion (Score:2)
75 million is virtually nothing. They have a looong way to go.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you care to deposit virtually nothing dollars into my account?
kthxbye
teams (Score:3)
I've used Teams and I'm as hostile to anything MS as any other thinking and breathing /. member.
It's actually not shitty and it became rapidly popular within companies within the past two months.
It is, however, like everything MS, an "also". Someone cobbled good ideas from various collaboration tools together. As always, it'll be a couple iterations until it's pretty good. We will see if the competitors can move ahead fast enough. At least by now everyone know's MS EEE strategy and is warned.
Re: (Score:1)
Teams is a disorganized potpourri of services. What MS should do is standardize the Team database schema and let open-source and internal programmers put UI's on it that fit their needs better, and perhaps add custom tables. MS could give starter examples to let people tinker with in their common tool-sets such as MVC-Core, Razor pages, and Azure Web-Apps*.
I know what I want to search for and see, I just can't write the SQL to give me that view of the data/info (and do the same for local/internal customers)
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft so desparately wants to be relevant. So I doubt they'll open it up lest they discover that other people can do stuff better than they can. Microsoft never opens anything up, even their open document standard is closed tighter than the ten year old jar of pickles at the back of my fridge.
Re: (Score:1)
They have opened up a bit over the years. They want to sell infrastructure more than applications these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Won't happen. That's not the MS game.
The MS game is to give the office jerks something that is good enough and just configurable enough to work for them, but static enough that it is instantly recognizable. See exhibit A: Excel.
The target audience is MBAs, not programmers. Always has been, always will be, no matter what some Balmer shouted when he had too much cocaine the night before.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, cobbled together. Then afterwords an elevator pitch is done to some senior VP. Next thing you know Skype for Business is cancelled, their team reassigned to janitorial services, and marketing comes up with a publicity push involving a novel virus and staying at home. Maybe I just dreamt that last part.
Teams is pretty good (Score:1)
It's like Slack, Discord, ...
It's hard to get excited about yet another implementation of an application. Fortunes were made and lost over spreadsheet software in the 80's and 90's. But it's not exciting, at all.
Re: (Score:2)
So, Azure DevOps. Just like Atlassian apps, except from Microsoft. And less useful (but I repeat myself). Microsoft REFUSES to be second banana to anyone and will waste so much money chasing their dream of being number one in anything involving a computer.
If its so great.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does it eat 600MB memory when idle?
Why does it bring the whole os to a grinding halt, maxing out cpu, when a meeting with 3 people starts?
Zoom or webex are not nearly such resource hogs in my experience. The only positive thing of Teams is that it has better audio quality than Skype ...
Re: (Score:3)
Because it is an Electron based application.
I guess so that it could be cross-platform.
It is a real hog though and I do hate that aspect of it.
However, it is definitely my daily driver now. I am in Teams more than I am in my e-mail client or web browser.
Re:If its so great.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Why does it eat 600MB memory when idle?
Telemetry.
Even when you're idle . . . telemetry isn't. Telemetry never sleeps.
Telemetry . . . all the way down.
Re: (Score:2)
Why does it eat 600MB memory when idle?
Why does it bring the whole os to a grinding halt, maxing out cpu, when a meeting with 3 people starts?
Because of a local configuration issue? Teams is a horrible piece of software, but it doesn't seem to use a lot of memory nor does it seem to have a negative impact on performance on any system I've used, except once, and that wasn't teams but some underlying service shared by Office which caused my IT department to proceed to re-image my entire workstation.
Re: (Score:2)
Teams is not done until (Score:2)
Zoom won't run! (on Windows that is)
Perhaps that is the new mantra within Planet Zog (aka Microsoft)
Great.... (Score:2)
Teams stinks (Score:3)
The UI is a pile of shit (no Microsoft, menu bars are not optional). It duplicates the Outlook calendar (pointless). It doesn't understand email addresses copied from Outlook (although that's mostly Outlook's fault for making it impossible to copy just the email address). It's a resource hog. There's no way to get notifications selectively (I don't want to be notified every time there's a chat message, but important msgs should be visible).
But mostly I hate it because it's yet another source of interruptions that I'm expected to have open at all times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm on OSX, so it is required to have menu bars, you can't escape that. But that is the most sparse menu bar I have seen in a long time. Microsoft is not into UIs anymore, as you can see with Metro and Windows 10, it's all about letting the user figure out obscure stuff on their own.
Oh, and my company is haviing Teams training. I don't recall being given special training on any other Microsoft application before, except those few times when training was really marketing in disguise.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the UI is shit, but the calendar being part of it is great, because I have a lot of meetings THROUGH TEAMS now. Being able to join a meeting directly from the application where the meeting is being held is one of the few bright points.
They have conversation threading in 'Teams' but not in chats, even if it's a group chat. Why?
It shows a lot of things as links (that are links) but if they're not something common like web or mail links, it eats them. You can click on them and nothing happens except it l
Re: (Score:2)
All those complaints and you missed the obvious: YOU CAN'T FRIGGING MULTITASK. The only multitasking you can do is minimise the chat window to do one other task. Got multiple monitors? hahahah you wasted your money.
Teams is a terrible name (Score:3)
Issues on both. (Score:1)
I'm a Linux user for day-to-day work. In our environment, we have Windows 10 desktops & laptops, MacOS Laptops, and Linux desktops & laptops (Mix of Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Fedora, and PopOS). We started using Slack, but when Microsoft released a Linux native Teams client, we made the decision to move to Teams.
BOTH apps have their issues and design flaws IMO. Notably, what's up with these apps not having sound notifications for the active channel of the app is in the foreground?
Anyway, they both have iss
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, I first see some chat messages or posts weeks after they were sent. A wonderful notification system that it has.
If its true, it costs too much (Score:2)
And yet.... (Score:1)
..this has a better chance of sticking around than the stuff Google produces.
It's sad because a company is supposed to bw building brand loyalty, but Google is doing the opposite with it's vanishware (not to be confused with vaporware)
They're really trying (Score:2)
They actually released a client for desktop Linux. The only way to get native calendar support for O365 that actually works is in teams.
It also shows how easily they could probably port Outlook, the only thing keeping my work machine running a win10 VM. But they already own that space, so windows only and a crappy web client is all you get, there.
They have both DEBs and RPMs on their download page. The packages also install a microsoft repo so it's automatically updated.
These are weird times.
Re:They're really trying (Score:4, Informative)
They actually released a client for desktop Linux.
It's an electron wrapper around a web app. You don't have to do a lot to make it work on Linux as the Electron team (and Chromium project) already did the heavy lifting for you.
If they weren't afraid of losing higher-tier O365 license sales (the ones where you get the native app rights), they'd do the same thing with Office Web too, since it already works in a browser on Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Already bigger (Score:2)
It is already bigger than Windows. Just look at your Task Manager and sort by Memory. I see 300MB taken by Teams, 5 times more than Skype for Business or Outlook.
This may be anecdotal evidence, but the boot time my work laptop doubled after Teams was installed on it.
In terms of CPU cycles consumed, it is also one of the bigger ones - 20-25% of i7-6600U when running an audio-only meeting between 2 people.
Here we go... (Score:1)
Office 365 / MVP (Score:1)
Until basic must-haves are implemented in Office 365 without the need to install the native Office application side by side, the digital strategy for Microsoft is a joke, and I refuse to use their half-baked products.
However if MS over the next decade shows that they support open source, do not engage in evil and counter-customer activity and makes the web-platform for all office documents and collaboration a pleasant user experience, I have no problem using their platform.
In the end I just want to not was