Creation of groups and channels for different work projects.Among its many different functions and features, we can point out the following: All the latter based on tasks, projects or business areas that can increase the fluidity of communications. It's based on the creation of a communications area conceived to create different workspaces.

Slack is an application aimed at optimizing it to the maximum extent. At least they should be and everybody complaints when they aren't.Communicating at work is a very important aspect, that sometimes isn't taken into account as it should, and that can improve our productivity significantly. Being nice to companies is a means to an end, not the goal itself, and the discussion about whether API should be legally accessible to third party vendors (or devices/cars/… should be legally repairable by third party repair shops) should focus on whether we get better user experience, service, and so on, and have the question of whether companies will still want to offer backend-service like Slack under such a law as a facet. There is no reason society can't agree to limit the options of keeping an API locked down in such contracts, especially for well established companies like Slack.Īnd I think the advantages of such a law are very clear: More competition on front-ends could very likely create much better user experience (better organization of chats, better message and image editor, better notifications, show users whether messages have actually been sent). Workers rights limit it, sanctions limit it, cartel and competition laws limit it. I assume your argument is that Slack has the 'freedom of contract', the right to create and offer you contracts of their choosing (and you are free to accept or decline them).

Slack download osx