jsheard 3 days ago

Users will continue to be beaten with the AI cudgel until morale improves.

Reply View 5 replies
  • sensanaty 2 days ago

    My company is doing some similar crap. Half a year wasted on some bullshit AI thing that half the engineers were questioning from the start. Usage numbers are in the low 10%-20% range and are dropping despite massive push from marketing and onboarding teams.

    The solution is to of course push even more AI stuff. The actual quote one of the C-level used was "Users don't understand the power of AI yet!" and I could barely hold in my laugh when I heard it.

    I've been feeling like the world has lost their fucking minds with the AI push. I know that VC/investors play a big role in it, but I've never seen anything quite like it. The AI toothbrush [1] really took the cake for me for peak of absurdity, I wonder what these geniuses will come up with next...

    [1] https://www.oralb.co.uk/en-gb/product-collections/genius-x

    Reply View 1 reply
    • wildrhythms a day ago

      Same story at my employer last year and this year. Leadership very clearly stated their goal is to increase AI engagement. Solving actual user issues? Not mentioned once. At least the shareholders are happy, right?

      Reply View 0 replies
  • Cthulhu_ 3 days ago

    Ah it's new tech, they just need to get used to it until they can't do without!

    Reply View 0 replies
  • Macha 3 days ago

    I do wonder if these kind of price cuts (see also Microsoft) will finally stop the demands from investors that everything be AI.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • makeitdouble 3 days ago

      When it's baked into the default price, more sales can be attributed to it (whether it's true or not), and more users will have used it (they're effectively paying for it, they'll at least try once)

      On paper it will look good, as long as a trend of users vocally bailing out of Workspace doesn't happen. And given the enterprise nature of it, I don't see that happening.

      Reply View 0 replies
paxys 3 days ago

Pretty much. A small set of customers weren't willing to pay for AI? Now everyone has to pay for AI.

Reply View 2 replies
whalesalad 3 days ago

Shid. I made the mistake of getting my entire family onto my google apps 15+ years ago. Now I am paying for about 8 people every month and this will just make it worse.

Reply View 1 reply
  • yieldcrv 3 days ago

    yes this particular seat price increase might be the one that breaks the camel’s back

    an ignorable monthly credit card charge, to one that has to go

    Reply View 0 replies
nashashmi 3 days ago

It was selling well enough. It just was not getting enough traction. By bundling AI, they are giving exposure to everyone who didn’t want to use it or didn’t see the need for it. If they pulled it away in 2 years, and then lowered the price and charged separately for AI, I think more people would see it as necessary.

AI is a better search engine. And a better grammar check for your emails. And a better writer for your reporting.

Reply View 1 reply
ra 3 days ago

I expect take up was in the low single-digit percentage points. So charging every single subscriber $2/user (even if they don't want it) probably yields significantly more revenue.

Reply View 1 reply
  • starfallg 3 days ago

    Pretty sure that's not how the maths worked out, but rather $2 is the amount that would cover the cost of running the service based on data of existing customer usage levels.

    This is a strategic play, not a revenue play.

    Reply View 0 replies