Skype for Business Reviews

My main use case for Skype for Business is internal communication across departments and between different government offices. We have staff spread across multiple locations in Malacca, and before Skype for Business, coordination between offices was mostly phone calls and emails which was slow. Now instant messaging, voice calls and meetings all happen on one platform.

From my side as network IT support, I use Skype for Business daily but probably differently from end users. I monitor the platform health, checking that there are no issues affecting calls or messaging, and that the integration with our Active Directory is functioning correctly.

We have noticed positive outcomes for our organization since adopting Skype for Business, including improvements in efficiency and reduced costs. We reduced our telephone costs meaningfully. Internal calls that used to go through the PABX system now go over the network through Skype for Business at no additional cost per call. Over a year that adds up.

The best features Skype for Business offers include the presence indicator, which sounds small, but people use it constantly. Knowing whether someone is available, in a meeting or away before you try to reach them cuts down on a lot of wasted calls. Staff picked that up immediately without any training. The integration with our Outlook for meeting scheduling is also very clean. You schedule a meeting in Outlook and the Skype for Business link is there automatically. For government staff who live in their email, that is the right way to do it.

The honest answer is that the product has not really evolved in some time. Microsoft has been pushing everyone towards Teams and Skype for Business has been in maintenance mode for a while. The mobile experience is also not great. Staff who try to use it on their phones find it less reliable than the desktop version, calls drop more, and the interface is clunky. For a modern workforce that expects everything to work on mobile, that is a gap.

Despite the initial setup challenges and mobile issues, we have noticed positive outcomes for our organization since adopting Skype for Business. I rate Skype for Business seven out of ten.

I think that Skype for Business has served us well for what it is. A government office has different expectations from a fast-moving private company. We value stability and security over the newest features. On those terms, Skype for Business has delivered.

I have been working in my current field for nine years.

Skype for Business is very stable. In four years on-premises, I can count the serious incidents on one hand.

The scalability of Skype for Business is adequate for our needs. We are not a huge organization and the Skype for Business server handles our user numbers comfortably.

We rely primarily on Microsoft's documentation and the technical community online for customer support. Direct Microsoft support for Skype for Business is available but given the product's direction, it is not something we have needed to use frequently.

I would rate the customer support as six out of ten. The documentation covers most situations but the product's declining support status from Microsoft is something you feel when you look for answers to less common issues.

I previously used mostly traditional PABX telephone calls and email.

The initial server setup for Skype for Business was complex. It took considerable time and we needed external technical assistance to get the on-premises deployment properly configured for an organization without dedicated server infrastructure expertise.

I have seen a return on investment. The telephone cost savings are measurable and positive. Beyond that, the productivity gain from faster internal communication is real even if it is harder to quantify precisely.

If I think back, my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing involves accessing it through our Microsoft Enterprise Agreement which covers the whole Office suite including Skype for Business. There is no separate line item for it which makes the cost difficult to separate out.

Before choosing Skype for Business, we looked at Cisco Webex and considered Microsoft Teams as an alternative since Microsoft was already pushing it.

The governance and security of Skype for Business are very good.

The accuracy and reliability of output is decent, but it can be better.

My advice to others looking into using Skype for Business is that if you are a government or regulated organization that needs on-premises deployment and you are already in the Microsoft ecosystem, it still makes sense for now. However, be honest about the migration conversation. I rate this product seven out of ten overall.

We use Skype for Business for internal meetings, conference calls, remoting into PCs, and phone calls.

Our virtual meetings typically include two or three participants, keeping them small.

It is easier to navigate compared to Microsoft Teams. While Teams is more in-depth and has more tools, Skype for Business is a handy application for phone calls and meetings.

I work with the screen sharing feature in Skype for Business, which performs better compared to other solutions.

The screen sharing functionality seems to work more efficiently. This could be related to our network configuration, but it consistently performs better.

The conversation history feature in Skype for Business is particularly useful because it links with Outlook. In contrast, Microsoft Teams deletes conversation history after 30 days due to GDPR regulations. It is beneficial to access conversations with colleagues from six months ago through Skype for Business.

I cannot think of many ways in which Skype for Business could improve in general.

It works fairly efficiently for our purposes with Skype for Business.

There is one issue regarding the audio settings. The application tends to select the internal microphone on devices rather than detecting external headphones. Users must manually adjust the settings to select the external audio device.

I have been using Skype for Business for more than five years.

I have never recorded anything in Skype for Business.

Skype for Business works fine and maintains stable performance.

Skype for Business is scalable. We currently use Microsoft Teams for larger meetings with up to 30 plus people.

I am not involved with the installation process. The technical team handles deployment through network updates.

We do not use solutions from Google, such as Google Cloud or Google Workspace.

I work with Microsoft Exchange.

We use Microsoft Azure, though I am not involved with the back-end operations.

I work with Microsoft Exchange and ServiceNow for the service desk.

I do not work with Cloud Observability or Automation Engine. We use Microsoft Copilot with Teams.

We do not use Microsoft Security Copilot as it is not cloud-based.

We have moved from Skype for Business to Teams recently, though some of us still use Skype for Business because it is convenient.

Skype for Business is particularly useful for remoting onto people's devices.

I prefer Skype for Business over Teams for screen sharing.

Sometimes there are compatibility issues when running Microsoft Teams and Skype for Business together. Phone calls in Teams might ring and then go silent, or the microphone might not detect calls from either application.

I rate Skype for Business a 9 out of 10 because it works effectively with minimal issues.

I use the solution at a personal level to communicate with my doctor.

I use the solution in my company to be able to communicate at a personal level.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that the tool provides simple functionalities in areas like video and voice quality, which is enough for me.

The inability to integrate Skype with other products is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Skype for twenty years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I haven't seen any glitches or bugs in the product.

I have never thought about the scalability aspect of the product, as it works fine for me without any problems. I believe that it is a scalable solution.

Depending on the person with whom I am dealing or having a meeting, I may use Zoom or Skype. I have not installed Zoom and prefer to use it on the browser. I cannot speak about the functionality offered by Zoom.

I have experience with Microsoft Teams.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy.

I use the product's open-source version.

I consider Skype to be a better solution compared to Zoom, which does not offer good security to its users.

Microsoft Teams is a better product than Skype since I could integrate the former with OneDrive and other tools, which is very useful for me.

I like the instant messaging feature in the product since I prefer to use the chat functionalities provided by the solution.

It is easy to integrate the product with some of the other solutions in the market. I rate the integration capabilities of the product a ten out of ten.

The product's user interface is user-friendly.

I use the product at a personal level, so I can't speak about the support it provides for the maintenance part.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

In the absence of an organization-wide Teams server, we use Skype for connecting with Teams clients and vendors. Skype is also used whenever large files need to be shared.

Using Skype allows us to connect with external agencies when a Skype call is set up and aids in sharing large files efficiently.

At the time when Skype was introduced, it was video-enabled, which was a feature we were very fond of. Performance is also seen as a strong feature compared to other vendors.

Earlier, there were some security concerns regarding the transfer of data on Skype, as it went to a different server. Those issues have been addressed. The user experience during long sessions could be improved to avoid issues like intermittent disconnections or login failures.

I have been using Skype personally for six years.

Skype is generally considered stable. Although there have been some disconnection issues and login failures, they are not critical.

Skype is scalable as we have held Skype sessions with large groups, although I do not know the number restrictions as I have not encountered any such issues.

As an enterprise customer, we receive priority support from Microsoft. I would rate Microsoft's support as eight out of ten.

Positive

I used to use Webex long back before transitioning predominantly to Skype.

The initial setup for Skype is straightforward and takes only a few minutes.

In terms of pricing, Skype is cheaper compared to other solutions.

Teams is another solution we use and compare with Skype.

For Skype to remain competitive, it should integrate security features and other AI functionalities, like subtitles, for enhanced user experience. There are many education software solutions with similar features, and Skype could benefit from incorporating them.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the product for conference calls. 

The tool's most valuable features are its audio and chat functions. They help us save time and have good telephone integration. 

The solution's functionality needs to be moved to Microsoft Teams. Its technology is outdated. 

I have been using the tool for ten years. 

The tool crashes at least once a week. I rate its stability as seven out of ten. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. My company has 5,000 users. 

I haven't contacted the tool's support. 

The tool's installation is easy. I use it on my laptop. 

Skype for Business' pricing is reasonable. 

I don't think Skype for Business has any future. Microsoft Teams is replacing it everywhere. I rate the tool a six out of ten. 

We use it for meter switching and connecting our Skype to the lines. Additionally, we have employed it for one-to-one lines, PRA, video conferencing, and unified communication needs.

The most valuable features of Skype for Business include its persistent chat, Edge Server, Reverse Proxy, front-end server, back-end server, and business calling capabilities, among others.

I believe optimizing the solution for lighter endpoints, particularly for embedded endpoints on mobile devices, would be valuable. For instance, the features available on Android endpoints may not be as comprehensive as those on desktop. In the next release of Skype for Business, it would be beneficial to see improvements in its integration with other Microsoft solutions.

I have been using the solution for the past eight years when it was known as Lync. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten.

Around 600 people are working with the solution in my area. I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

The tech support is excellent.

Before choosing Skype for Business, we used solutions such as BigBlueButton (BBB) and open source universal communication platforms. We found these alternatives to be effective.

The solution's initial setup was complex, and I rate my experience with the setup as a three out of ten. Additionally, the installation process took approximately one to two months from start to finish.

The solution was implemented through an in-house team.

When it comes to the pricing of the solution, I rate it as a five out of ten. It falls somewhere in the middle between being cheap and expensive.

I have experience working with various solutions in the IT field, including Microsoft Active Directory, DNS, IT management, BKMS, and Microsoft Exchange. I'm also working with VMware backup and replication solutions, including automatic verification. Additionally, I'm training in Commvault Backup. I'm also experienced in working with tape libraries and other backup solutions.

I would say that you should be aware that the solution's end-of-life was scheduled for the end of July 2021.

I use the solution for video calls at work.

The solution’s video quality is fine.

The solution has very limited features. The solution should improve the chat and add more flexibility to make a call.

I have been using Skype for Business for around five years.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for stability.

The solution has high scalability.

I previously used Microsoft Teams. I switched to Skype for Business because of security issues.

The initial setup of the solution is difficult, but it's because of some limitations my company has regarding security issues.

A maximum of 20 people can be on the same call. I would recommend the solution to other users because you can use it on-premises.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for team meetings and sharing desktop views when working with other team members.

We use the tool for problem-solving, sharing screenshots, and walking through demonstrations. The product makes working with members in a geographically dispersed environment easier.

Desktop sharing is a valuable feature. It is easy to demonstrate workflows and procedures while problem-solving and administration of products. I use what's available, and the product does the job I need it to do. Desktop sharing is the most beneficial feature for enhancing team collaboration.

The video conferencing quality can be improved. The video conferencing quality can be temperamental with internet access and bandwidth availability for a geographically dispersed team environment.

I have been using the solution for 12 months.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten. We face some stability issues, but it might be just problems around bandwidth accessibility since I am geographically dispersed from the rest of my team.

The tool is highly scalable. We use it on a large scale. We have a couple of hundred users. Almost 50% to 60% of the users’ time is spent using the tool.

We were using mobile phones to connect with our team before. We started using Skype for Business because it was a business-delivered product.

The solution can be very effective for geographically dispersed technical support organizations. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We are a software company, so we communicate via Skype with our end customers, including product companies.

Screen share is one of the features of the solution I like the most. The product also offers good connectivity over voice calls.

When I compare Skype for business with Microsoft Teams, I feel that Microsoft Teams has picked up more in recent years since it offers end-to-end connectivity and also connects with various systems making it more than just a messaging or calling tool. Microsoft Teams offers me a repository to store data and is also connected to SharePoint. Skype is a smaller application compared to Microsoft teams, offering wider scope to its uses. Skype's overall connectivity functionality or ability is one area with room for improvement.

Our organization recommends using Microsoft Teams as much as possible since it is closely tied to our operating system, making it easy to connect or sync with our local systems. The ability to create repositories, the ease with which it can be accessed, and the ease with which we can collaborate with our peer groups to work on data make it much more advanced than Skype.

In our company, we use Skype for Business with our customers. Basically, we are just users of the product. Also, we have been using the product for around five years now. As of now, I don't remember the product's version.

I rate the solution's stability a nine on a scale where one is not stable and ten is very stable.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight on a scale where one is not scalable and ten is very scalable. The scalability of the solution can be improved.

Since I work in an organization with an IT team that takes care of the technical part, I have never had an opportunity to interact with Skype's technical support team. Owing to the fact that we never had any issues with the product from a technical support perspective, I rate the solution a seven or eight.

Neutral

I rate the solution's initial setup a nine on a scale where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The deployment model is a corporate version which is used within corporate organizations.

Since I am using a corporate account for which I have not made any payments, I would not be able to speak about the solution's price.

I want to tell others who plan to use the solution that though it can increase the scope, they should first probably compare it with Microsoft Teams. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The product is needed to communicate with people in different locations. Our company is in Germany. I'm in Istanbul. If I have a serious issue on the client side I can use Skype for Business to communicate and resolve issues. 

I'm using Microsoft Teams, and it's very similar to it. However, I don't actually have more advantages from Teams versus Skype for Business. 

Screen sharing, control in the session, and file sharing are easy. 

I like the chat application and the features it offers.

The security seems good. it may even be more secure than Teams. 

I'm not sure if it is possible to invite customers to meetings is they are outside the company. There might be some invitation issues with Skype for Business.

Skype for Business is not as popular as Teams. Teams has a file sharing area, which is useful. That wasn't in the Skype for Business. Skype for Business is just for chatting. However, there are no rich components like in Teams. Teams have a lot of features. Skype isn't as robust. 

I've only used the solution for eight or nine months. 

The stability has been perfect. It's reliable. There are no issues with bugs or glitches. 

I'm not sure about the scalability. I don't know how easy it is to add users, for example. That's handled more on the company side. 

We have about 350 at the company using the product. 

I've had an issue in the past and reached out to technical support. They were helpful and responsive. 

We've used TeamViewer for very specific accounts. We've also used Microsoft Teams. It's better than Skype for Business as it integrates more effectively.

The initial setup is not too difficult or entirely easy. It's somewhere in the middle. It's a moderate setup. 

The solution does have a license cost, however, I don't have any knowledge of the exact pricing. 

I'm a customer and a user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

I do tend to use normal Skype for personal use. While we use Skype for Business, they are moving more towards Microsoft Teams. 

Nowadays, you should just maybe buy the Microsoft package. If you are using a Windows laptop, then you need Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Teams will come with this package. I prefer Microsoft Teams, actually. We have been using Microsoft Teams for the last three or four years.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

It's a good product. It's not that bad. That said, not a lot of people are using it.