To our Zoom users around the world, Whether you are a global corporation that needs to maintain business continuity, a local government agency working to keep your community functioning, a school teacher educating students remotely, or a friend that wants to host a happy hour to spark some joy while social distancing, you are all …
RT @mcannonbrookes: Kudos to @Ericsyuan & the @zoom_us team on managing through this intense period.
- 10m daily meeting participants in Dec
- 200m in March 🚀
That’s insane growth & very hard to manage for any service. Thank you for all you do & this thoughtful post 👏🏻 https://t.co/y6zlt10Y24
RT @zoom_us: We appreciate the scrutiny and questions we have been getting – about how the service works, about our infrastructure and capacity, and about our privacy and security policies. These are the questions that will make Zoom better [Blog Post] https://t.co/tDcWxRIF2V by @ericsyuan
Strong blog post by @ericsyuan, CEO of Zoom, on how they’re fixing all the issues that arise when you go from enterprise software with 10M users to universal tool with 200M users (!!) in three months.
Amazing work keeping the service up. Now to harden it.
RT @octal: I'm a user of @zoom_us and very happy to see them taking security more seriously -- it's still the best platform for conferencing today for the vast majority of users, and with better security, it can be the best for even more users. https://t.co/0QEvmDp1r3
I think thats fair. All of us who have written and deployed software know that a change in the onboarding/new users rate like this would be a punch in the face that would knock any SW team on its ass. And it would take anyone a few days to get back up.
The important part is the leaderships reaction to the situation. Compare to something like Boeing. Zoom acknowledges facts, takes responsibilty and starts fixing things. Boeings reaction to its product killing hundreds of people was “Lol user error. RTFM”. That is (apparently) what acceptable leadership can look like..
Any sw product has issues. The question is what the company does about it
This is "we are sorry for getting caught" changes-nothing nonpology.
The use of "end to end encryption" designation was no confusion, it was deception - it is implausible that this could have been done accidentally or as a result of a misunderstanding without engineers warning managers that this is not how zoom works and being overridden in their objections to communicate it as such.
They also double down on data collection. Disclosure does not establish consent and "we do not sell data" is a red herring because data can still be shared with third parties for business purposes against the interests of the users without being overtly sold (not to mention with governments under various "compelled cooperation" arrangements) and the entire policy can be subject to retroactive change without recourse.
The fact that they were targeting organizations with IT support is irrelevant except maybe to discredit the people within those organizations who greenlighted Zoom.
The saddest part is that it is unlikely any of the competing corporate offers are any better in any of those respect, but then they are not being actively pumped these days.
The moral of the story is once again that focusing on user acquisition at all costs is an effective strategy. MongoDB disregarded reliability, Youtube disregarded copyright, Reddit faked comments, Facebook disregarded privacy. Yet they were all ultimately successful. Could it have happened differently ? Not so sure.
Translation: "We are SO sorry that we got caught and that you feel this way about us. Let's see if we can react to this situation fast enough before everyone will start replacing us with alternatives that at least have a better reputation." ... yeah, give me a break!