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
Coda by Grammarly
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Coda, acquired by Grammarly in early 2025, is a template-based document creation and collaboration solution, supporting a variety of use cases.
$0
per month
Pricing
Chatter (discontinued)
Coda by Grammarly
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Free
$0.00
per month
Pro
$10.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Team
$30.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Enterprise
Custom Pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Chatter (discontinued)
Coda by Grammarly
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
—
With Coda, you only pay for Doc Makers.
Often one person creates a doc, others edit it, and some simply observe from afar. Instead of charging for everyone, we only charge for the people who create docs.
Interested in enterprise pricing? Visit coda.io/enterprise
Slack, Hangouts, there are a ton of messaging/social apps out there. Overall, I like to use Slack and Hangouts more as a messaging tool. However, when there are certain things that HAVE to get done within Salesforce, I can totally understand why Chatter would be important. When …
We were using Skype for business before, but Skype was mostly good at team communication and sharing activities/updates only. Since we started using Salesforce, we got the best option by using Chatter's added advantages. By using it we don't miss any action items. It's a …
Because Chatter is tied into our CRM I feel it is easier to use. Teams is better for instant answers and chats. Chatter is better for a data storage of ideas and answers. While they both have there advantages It is hard to say which is more valuable on their own.
Chatter is a solid tool within Salesforce. Slack has become more commonplace within our organization, but the fastest way to find out what is going on within an account or opportunity is to check the Chatter feed. I think there are different uses for each of the tools, but …
Slack utterly dominates chatter. Slack is searchable, has the use of channels. When you can sync it with Salesforce (there are multiple ways to automate alerts or notifications to be sent from Salesforce to Slack), it renders Chatter useless. Slack makes me never want to use …
Chatter is simply the most accessible, user-friendly, and convenient on the go platform we enjoy utilizing daily to help our company grow and boost overall revenue. Without the many features, Salesforce offers daily. We would be unable to capitalize on many lead and application …
We are using Chatter just because it is integrated with SFDC, and we use SFDC as our CRM. We use other communication tools as well. You can find communication tools in many applications and platforms, I recommend using the very specific ones, like Chatter, for only the teams …
There's a variety of communication tools available for selection out in the market place but I like the easy to navigate system of Chatter. I think there's a whole bunch of more features available in Chatter that I currently do not utilize but I think it's a good robust option.
We also use Teams. Chatter is very helpful in that I can directly tag any object in our CRM. Instead of taking email requests for admin needs, I have added a Chatter process builder that helps me manage requests. If the case calls for a report to be made, I am able to tag the …
We have also tried to use Slack and Service Now. Service Now simply did not have the features we needed. Slack was useful but not nearly as good for the end users who simply want very simple. Slack confused the end user which caused them frustration, which also meant they did …
It is tough because there are several applications that allow for internal communication among teams. Chatter, however, is the only one that's native to Salesforce and allows for all communication to be attached to their respective artifacts. We use Slack in addition to Chatter …
I personally like Google Hangouts more due to the flow of conversations. I find it a much more efficient way to speak back and forth with work colleagues, other than face-to-face of course. But, as a manager I could see how Chatter would be useful to use when managing pipeline.
Chatter was within Salesforce already, so we simply went with it because it's attached and integrated well within Salesforce and Google Drive and Gmail.
Salesforce Administrator & Business Systems Analyst
Chose Chatter (discontinued)
Chatter is much more basic than other solutions, mainly, because it is not the core product for Salesforce. It is great for basic communication needs, but if you are looking for a much more robust solution then I would recommend using an application that is more focused on …
Coda is a more complete package that is very robust and will meet the needs of almost any organization who wants to track project and meet desired timelines. By implementing project trackers the team can easily collaborate together and get the work done. Coda is much easier to …
We previously used airtable, and I'm not sure why we switched, but it seems like Coda has more flexibility and is a little more user friendly for generic users and not power users.
Coda is not as great as ClickUp or Notion in many ways, but it surely has a better user interface and pricing in my view and allows good collaboration. However, integrations work much better with other competitors as compared with Coda, and would prefer others if pricing was …
Trello seems to be more focused on IT oriented projects where as Coda has wide scale applications across all departments. Coda was selected because of the perception it was more dynamic and I believe it has proven to be more dynamic. Coda is a very easy to use and understand …
I don't know why leadership choose Coda over Google, but I do see the value in the organization as well as diversity of what you can do with pages designs and integrations
We used Airtable for a while and looked at Notion briefly. Airtable is good, yet a bit technical and doesn't come with rich text and formatting capabilities--so less suitable for publishing/sharing with the rest of the organization. We haven't used Notion for real; I did look …
Coda is very aesthetically appealing and fun to create docs. The benefit of Coda is that it makes a lot automated, but what is sacrificed is the flexibility that other tools can offer.
For general use cases, Google Docs or Airtable are often a better starting place. But if things get complex or you're constantly pairing the two together, consider graduating to Coda to save yourself long-term headaches.
Notion is great for personal use, but the powerful …
The tables within Coda are similar to lists in SharePoint or Google Tables, but the document portion of Coda is what sets it apart. Having the ability to summarize that table data in a document is unique to Coda.
Coda is the only tool with the ability to fully customize your views and the behavior within a given data table. They've put a LOT of thought into this and are miles above and beyond Smartsheet, Airtable, and Notion (I've evaluated all three extensively).
We were looking for many different things to improve our internal processes before we came across Coda. A large part of my work involves marketing, project management, service management and data analytics. For a company like ours, we find Coda the most cost-effective and …
I first tried Notion and, although it can be easier to work with for some simple tasks, when it comes to tables and linked data, Coda is more versatile and comprehensive.
For the use we needed in the company, Coda was a way easier and simpler solution. Jira and the Atlassian suite is more complete and structured, but it is was way too complicated.
Coda's automation and flexibility makes it much easier and more interactive than other tools like Airtable. With Airtable, we couldn't get as much traction or flexibility, so we stopped using it after a few months. Jira, on the other hand, has proven to be more helpful for task …
I primarily use Mavenlink for scheduling purposes but with Coda, I'm able to do that, plus have an open way to communicate with the rest of my team when we want to add certain artists to a specific job. Instead of using another software for communicating across all of our …
They are similar but I like that Coda has more templates that are suited for marketing (GTM timelines, pulse updates, etc). One pain point for us is getting the engineering team on Coda but they seem to prefer Jira and Aha!
While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use …
The price point is most attractive, they have a dedicated team of support agents/doc makers that provide valuable templates, and it really was the best option to fit our current needs as a startup team who will be scaling and the product can scale with us in the long run.
[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.
Coda is great to build a place for your users to go to and see information. It is easy to navigate through and the variety of content creation is great. However, it is not always easy to create what you want and there is a lot of playing around and learning. Coda also sometimes misses some functionality which is expected. For example, downloading a list of users that have access to the platform. Being able to send push notifications when a new page has been created etc. Overall it is a good tool to use just be prepared to invest time!
One source of truth: It's incredibly easy to keep everything organized and easy to find.
Being able to show different views of the same information throughout your doc makes it really easy to customize the information.
In general, I love the "coding" aspect of it, and being able to do advanced functions has helped us create some really interesting automation and streamline our process.
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.
Coda is definitely something that has been proven to drive positive impact in our organization. We have many divisions that can benefit from this that we have yet to explore. It would definitely be worth renewing.
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.
There is a little bit of a learning curve on where to point and click to add in different elements and make edits. But it is still very manageable once you get the hang of it. I do still have some issues with some of my connected pages updating each other when I don't want them to sync. So I'll end up editing one page, and it will make the same edits on another page.
We haven't done any integrations - the initial part of our experience we found that for docs with complex formulas, the page tends to load slowly but in recent months, Coda has improved and optimized the loading times in general and we generally don't find any problems in terms of speed anymore.
I haven't had to use support often, but when I have Salesforce was very responsive. Like with all things Salesforce, it is easy to use and doesn't have too many issues, so I don't think that people will have to use support often, but if so, they are easy to work with and helpful within the product.
Mainly due to timezone differences. I think Coda's support in general is well implemented and executed. They know their stuff and are helpful. But since I'm not in the same timezone, solution rates are slower for me, and that's not something I prefer. I work in customer service, too, and more often than not, time is important. Shortening the solution time would be a much greater experience.
I'm relatively inexperienced but this experience is meaningful. It would have been nice to have some guidance from Coda so that we understood more on Coda's purpose and potential.
Because Chatter is tied into our CRM I feel it is easier to use. Teams is better for instant answers and chats. Chatter is better for a data storage of ideas and answers. While they both have there advantages It is hard to say which is more valuable on their own
For general use cases, Google Docs or Airtable are often a better starting place. But if things get complex or you're constantly pairing the two together, consider graduating to Coda to save yourself long-term headaches. Notion is great for personal use, but the powerful automation and collaboration features in Coda make it a better fit for teams in my experience so far.
I think scalability is definitely good here since it's based on number of doc makers. Implementation into each dept becomes simpler. That being said, due to the nature of our work, we find it easier that we have a "super user" and then a team of other doc makers. This would make the doc creation and management more efficient.
This has had a very positive impact when it comes to verifying if proper communication has been had among teams. This helps us know when and what people have been informed of, which gives us the opportunity to regularly review our communication styles.
This has had a very positive impact when trying to find particular individuals in a very large company, and without any barriers.
This also provides a 'get networking' tool for new and existing individuals to the company, helping people gain influence and awareness among their stakeholders.