Chatter was a collaboration platform with integration into the business process and the ability to conduct actions like approving expense reports and creating support cases from the activity feed itself. It was acquired by Salesforce and is currently discontinued.
N/A
Nuclino
Score 6.4 out of 10
N/A
Nuclino is a unified workspace where teams can organize knowledge, manage projects, and share ideas, all in one place. Progress can be tracked in a Kanban board, work structured in a hierarchical list, or data organized in a visual graph — Nuclino adapts to a team's unique workflow. Presented as simple and lightweight by design, Nuclino focuses on the essentials, doing away with clunky menus and rarely-used settings, and minimizing the learning curve for new users. The vendor states it…
$5
per month per user
Pricing
Chatter (discontinued)
Nuclino
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Free
$0
per month per user
Standard
$5
per month per user
Premium
$10
per month per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Chatter (discontinued)
Nuclino
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Nuclino offers a free plan for up to 50 items and 2GB total storage. Paid plans start at $5/user/month (billed annually) or $6/user/month (billed monthly) and include unlimited items, advanced features, and 10GB storage per user.
[Chatter] is the tool that makes our relations stronger. It provides advanced ways of communication. I have trained my many team members because of the easy features and functions of this tool, It is very user-friendly. Give it a try if you want to improve your relations with your customers. It will surely enhance the productivity of your organization.
Chatter provides us with a live internal conversation for all to see without the noise that other mediums have i.e. e-mail.
One of the main features that really works well is the 'Groups' that you can join. We have multiple groups set up to not only distribute procedural changes and communicate news etc, but also have conversations around upcoming tasks in the months ahead.
Chatter works really well in instances where we need to look over historical conversations that have been had and the sentiment of those conversations with our shareholders, often using hashtags.
Groups does not have the private messaging functionality. Since most collaboration takes place in Groups, private messaging would allow for relevant conversations to be contained and not reside separately.
On a Group index page, there are two boxes for Information and Description. These content types seem redundant. You could replace both with a content type called About the Group. There could also be another box listing the Owners for quick reference.
On the main index page, the newsfeed has the same look and feel of most social platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn, Jive, IBM Connections, SharePoint. There could be an alternate display of tiles that shows People you interact with most frequently, Files you access most often, most recent Topics, etc. The display could be something like Delve in Microsoft Office 365.
On the main index page in the right rail, it would be useful to have the ability to incorporate RSS feeds to gather outside content. Many departments heavily leverage RSS feeds to compile competitive intelligence and cultivate general awareness.
For user profiles, can we combine Feed and Overview into one consolidated view? It would save users a click to find relevant information about the person. Also, the Contact module should also have the person's phone number for convenience.
The Files feature does not allow for real-time, concurrent document editing. You have to download the document, make your edits, save, and then upload a new version, which only allows for one editor at a time.
Chatter can fulfill at least 85-90% of our business requirements in an easy-to-use platform. Usability is a key requirement and we have had our share of bad usability experiences. In our experience, even the most novice users were able to pick up Chatter in a relatively short amount of time with little/no assistance.
It is easy to use but the impact of it feels like it is a bit antiquated. It does not feel collaborative and real time. Chatter is more akin to email versus Slack or Hangouts where it feels like problems are being solved as you are communicating.
I love Nuclino's usability. The layout is clean, simple, easy to follow, and bright. I like that there is a read-only account option so that less-tech savvy people can still use it and they won't need to worry about deleting key information from the database. Similarly, I like the features that allow multiple contributors to have the same features to edit.
If I ever came to a situation where i needed help they do a very good job of getting back to us quickly to explain our error or why we are not seeing something. The support is quick to help provide groups or teams if you seek. Fortunately it is user friendly so I rarely need support
Skype is used more for audio calls. Chatter is used to track updates on items of interest in Salesforce. Chatter is deeply integrated with other Salesforce products. No other competing products come close. Slack is a traditional project management tool. So it does not compete with Chatter. Because of its close integration with Salesforce, it is a unique tool for Salesforce users.
Nuclino is the clear winner when it comes to ease of use for both the administrator and user. Less setup time and less "training" time. The streamlined interface is quick and intuitive to learn and is not cluttered as compared to Confluence. Every tool you need to use to create a page or administer the workspace is available immediately on screen or by right-clicking. In contrast, Confluence buries many tools in administrative interfaces and only allows use of some features once you make several clicks to include a "macro" or "plug-in". We use both tools and I get complaints constantly from my team about how complicated Confluence can get just to author a quick page.
Having a central documentation allowed users to find data more quickly, which resulted in 50% less "question" type bugs that would appear in our queue.
Collaborating documentation before development resulted in less bugs; this is part process but the ease of sharing and making related documentation easy to access encouraged users into adapting the process.
Increased use in documentation allows support response time to be higher for triage since supporting documentation is ready to go.
