Microsoft Teams Reviews

We use Microsoft Teams for meetings, organizing video calls, and video conferences. We also use it for the team chat function, the chat. All the product lines have their own group set up here. So they can share information through chatting and conference calls.

I put the live captions up when I am on a call and want to mute it. I like that feature. The recording of scripts and the playback of videos are good features. If I have to write the minutes for a call, I'll just take the script output and copy and paste it.

The recording function, the transcript function, the chat function, the live caption function, and the setting up of groups to share documents are useful features of Microsoft Teams.

Sometimes the transcript is a bit literal, it doesn't interpret the voice, and the text that comes out is a bit nonsensical. It would be good if the solution had some sort of AI built into it while taking the transcript so that at least the sentences made sense. It puts rubbish words in them, but just a bit of AI could solve that.

I have been working with Microsoft Teams for four years.

I rate Microsoft Teams an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate Microsoft Teams an eight out of ten for scalability. About 20,000 users use Microsoft Teams in our organization.

Sometimes when we're using it from home, videos can break up a little bit. However, I'm not sure if it's an issue with the solution or if it's people's network connections. Our organization practically had all its staff using the solution throughout the pandemic, and it scaled well then.

I've used Zoom, and we had Skype for Business in some of my other companies, and I'd say that Microsoft Teams is a more complete and rounded product. The other solutions work more or less the same for video conferencing. However, as a product, Microsoft Teams is more complete and has more features than Zoom or Skype.

The initial setup of Microsoft Teams is very straightforward.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Teams an eight out of ten.

We use the product for chats and VoIP. We also have an Auto attendant feature. We have different departments, teams, and channels, so a lot of files are shared. We just started integrating different applications like Okta. We are using Okta as a plugin and are starting to do automated workflows within it. If we send a message and ask for access to Adobe Acrobat, it'll run a workflow and notify the person in Teams and email.

The product has improved communication in our organization. When I joined the organization, we were using Skype for Business, and there weren't a lot of group chats. Group chats are huge in Teams. I don't remember ever doing that on Skype for Business or any other platform. The product has really improved collaboration with other departments, like our developers and the operations team.

The meeting features are great. It is really easy. The group chats and chat history are valuable features.

The video quality has to be improved. The integration with SharePoint can be cumbersome at times.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The scalability depends on use cases. If we are just using chats, it is very scalable. If we use it like SharePoint or any file-sharing solution to take over old technologies, we get limited, and storage becomes pricey. We have had calls with more than 100 people. It does pretty well. 

If there is an issue, if someone is dropping calls or unable to hear anything, we can see their recent calls and track their network connectivity through the admin center. It usually ends up being the user’s internet issues, not a Microsoft issue. Around 550 users are using Microsoft Teams in our organization.

We have connected with the support team. The team has been helpful. The product has a roadmap of new features and stuff that will be implemented, which we can upvote. I've seen a feature request being turned into an actual feature. They’re very responsive.

Neutral

We were using Skype for Business. Then, we migrated to Microsoft Teams because Skype for Business was retired. It was no longer a viable option.

The initial setup is pretty easy. From the Microsoft 365 admin center, we can ensure it’s on for the organization, ensure it's deployed to users, and check guest access and network connectivity for things to run smoothly. We can see it all in a little dashboard. Now they have a new team, so things are a little different.

The deployment took probably three months. We did it by ourselves. A coworker and I deployed the product in our organization.

I have seen an ROI on the product. Collaboration is through the roof. We use it every single day. Everybody in the company uses it.

The pricing works in bundles. It costs around $12 for SharePoint and Teams per user. The license for E5 would be more than $300 because it includes a lot of things. The pricing is high. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten. Once you cross the given threshold, you must pay for storage. It gets a little pricier.

There are multiple places to do the same thing within the Microsoft realm. People working with teams must stick with it. It gets easier, and the features start getting better. It also has third-party plugins, workflows, and notes. There are a lot of interesting things in the product. When I was working for a hedge fund, we used to have a little application on which the traders would chat with each other. Microsoft does everything to about 70%. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We're a tech services company and have numerous use cases for this solution, whether it be for meetings and chat, for collaborations, sharing files, document libraries, collaborating on Word documents and Excel. We use the solution every day, almost as much as we use email. We're partners with Microsoft and I'm the company delivery practice director. 

It's improved our organization by enabling us to create a channel where we collaborate on all the projects and communicate instantly. You can set up a meeting for that channel which links to your personal calendar, it's very good. 

I believe the chat messaging is a very valuable feature. It's not like Skype or Google Hangouts where you chat and once you're done you'll never find it again. This solution sticks with the chat until it's deleted and it also enables the application of backend retention policies so it can be saved longer. If you need to adhere to any regulation or compliancy regarding data retention you can set policies for that. Within a Teams meeting, you can put in all your meeting notes, whiteboards, all sorts of communication tools that you use. It's a very simple, intuitive platform. The learning curve for clients is minimal.

If you're using this product in a big corporation with a lot of data to manage, finding something specific can become very complex and the solution can become a little bit quirky. If I'm searching for a file in Teams, I might not find the relevant information right away. I think the search feature could be improved in that regard although any platform might have issues when dealing with masses of data. It's a management challenge when you're dealing with that amount of data. 

I'd like to see better ways of managing data, perhaps create a life cycle, possibilities for deletion or archiving. So, at this point we don't have, there is a way to do that, but it's it's really complex to do. There's a way to do it now but it's very complex. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

It's a very stable solution. Once in a while we may have some issues when users complain that things are moving slowly, but I've never experienced outages. 

It lives in the cloud, so it's scalable. We're a relatively small company and have approximately 300 users but some of our client companies are huge and can have somewhere between 10,000-30,000 users. We don't have dedicated deployment staff but we have an internal IT department that takes care of things. 

The quality of technical support really depends on the tier of support a company has. We don't have any issues because we have a lot of Microsoft and former Microsoft employees, but if we were a client without premier support, then we'd want to see some improvement in the technical support. 

We used Skype before moving over to Teams. Some of our clients also use Slack so we use it too. Teams is unique because the other solutions are more for chat or video but lack the collaboration of Teams.

The initial setup is straightforward. Because the software as a service is part of Office 365, it only requires a user a license, and then you can download the product or push it with whatever tools you have, whether it's configuration manager or Intune, you push it to the endpoints. The other way it can be set up is using an SAAS application, where you don't have to worry about infrastructure in the backend, and you just need a good internet connection. 

From what I know the licensing comes in a bundle. There is an enterprise license that comes with email, Office Suite like Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint and a second possible option without the added features. I believe that the fees are charged based on the number of users. 

The transition to this solution is very quick so don't hesitate to give it a go, particularly for anyone already using Microsoft products. If they're using Google or Slack, it depends how they want to consolidate it. The adaptation to this solution is very quick, clients love it and can easily see the power of it. It's a cloud collaboration piece and integrates with products. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We've got different groups for each course at the university on Teams, so we use it mostly as a communication platform with students and staff. We use the file-sharing function, which is based on SharePoint.

The file-sharing function is connected to the SharePoint platform, we mostly use this, and most of the time, these components are integrated with Office applications like Excel or PowerPoint. 

We don't have the email function in Teams. We use a separate software for that, and unfortunately, we don't have the Calendar function.

Communication within the university has improved. For one, every conversation has its history well organized, making it easier to search for previous conversations or topics. 

Also, the contact list views are useful; everyone from the university is there, and you can easily make a video call. It's easier for students to reach teachers, and communication is faster because you get notifications.

We also use it with the integration of Microsoft applications.

The data IP identification for each message and the ability to organize discussions in separate channels within a team.

Microsoft Teams' video conferencing capabilities are good. The direction is very good, especially since we started using that feature early on. 

The experience has gotten a lot better. In the beginning, it was difficult for a lot of people in a video conference. We couldn't see all the participants or it was difficult to move the screens around. But now, it's much more convenient to use.

It's great for meetings and even hybrid classes, for example, where the teacher has students attending in person and online at the same time. It's really convenient for that too, and I like that you can easily share presentations.

Sharing presentations is easy, which is particularly convenient for hybrid classes where the teacher has students both on-site and online.

The only issue is sometimes, when I share my screen, and there's text on it, the compression can make it very blurry. If Teams could solve this problem so that text remains clear during screen sharing, that would be nice.

We started using Microsoft Teams at the company four years ago.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. There have been some problems throughout using Teams, but they only affected one or two days at most. 

From my point of view,  the scalability seems very good. We didn't have any problems. It's not the highest level we have from Microsoft services, but even with courses with more than a hundred participants, there are no problems.

There are around a thousand end users in my university. Students come in and they graduate, so that number doesn't change much.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, with ten being easy to set up. 

It is easy to set up. 

The pricing is okay. The higher education department manages the subscription, so I am unaware of the licensing costs. 

I would recommend using different types of Teams for work. You can create several kinds of things for your work, and that's a key or very important point to select the right one for your needs. 

Also, it is good to know about other applications you can integrate with it because that can also increase productivity.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution in our company primarily for collaboration, file sharing, and the chat functionality it provides our team.

If you talk about the tool's disadvantages, it consists of losing connection. It's also a problem that it only stores information for up to 40 days. The aforementioned areas can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for almost four years. I am using the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, the major issue is with the connection since it loses pieces of chats in between. Therefore, people don't rely on the tool since they know that whatever they have communicated with someone may not always be in their chat history.

Microsoft Teams is a scalable tool because it integrates with many other tools and different kinds of apps. It is a really good tool because you can plan your meetings, you can take notes, and run your scrum meets. In all the aforementioned aspects, it's really good.

Maybe more than 500 users are using the tool in our company.

Only the IT personnel interacting with Microsoft would have experience with Microsoft's technical support.

Slack was used quite a lot before. Microsoft Teams is a replacement for Skype as well. Skype has been totally ruled out now by our company.

Microsoft Teams is much better because Skype is just a very small tool used for its chat functionality. With Teams, you get many different features for sharing files. However, Microsoft Teams has a problem of losing connection many times, though not always, but it gets slow. It has the problem of storing information for only up to 30 days or 40 days, depending upon your organization's policy. Hence, not many people at times prefer to interact over the tool since their conversation gets lost.

It's a good product. I think that with the package of Microsoft Outlook itself, most organizations are going forward with Microsoft Teams. I am not aware if there is anything else that they would be looking forward to, but I can say that the tool has a scope for improvement. As a user of the tool, I can say that Microsoft Teams is not a 100 percent reliable solution.

Trust is the main factor. I see that users do not trust the tool, and they still prefer to send emails because they feel that whatever information they are sending using the tool may get lost. Hence, that makes it a big concern.

I rate the overall solution a six out of ten.

We use the product for internal and client meetings. 

The solution has improved internal collaboration. We can seamlessly interact on a number of documents by projecting them on the screen. This experience is not with internal teams but with clients as well.

The solution has a plugin app called Whiteboard which is useful. I am also impressed with the product's projecting on screen, audio and the video. 

The chat option in the Teams tab is not very helpful. We don't use it very often. There is also an expiration on the recordings. It would be useful to not have a time limit.

I have been using the product since the start of the lockdown in March 2022. 

I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. I have faced issues due to network connectivity. 

I would rate the product's scalability a nine-point five out of ten. The whole world uses Office and it's an extension of it. My company has around 200 users for the product. Since we are a law firm, users are mostly non-technical persons. We use the solution daily. 

I have been never required to contact the technical support at Microsoft since the functionality is basic. 

We have used VC software but switched to Teams because its easier to understand. 

The tool's installation is easy and it is installed on our laptops. The solution's deployment was fast and we deployed it throughout the organization within two to three days. One technical person from our Delhi office helped us with the product's installation. I think that one person would be enough to handle the installation in an office of 60 people. 

The product's installation was done in-house. The IT team helped us with that. They took our laptops and helped us to install them.

We have a subscription to Zoom. Zoom is more suited for conferences and seminars or when you have a large number who are attending the meeting. Teams is useful when you have a small gathering and want to have focused conversations with either your clients or internally. 

I would rate the product a nine-point five out of ten because of the ease of use. The solution is integrated with Office 365's Calendar. You can open Outlook and access it from there which makes it very seamless. The solution is a great software and I recommend it highly. The main reason that Teams have an edge is that, in most offices, there is limited accessibility to Gmail and hence problems with Google Meet. 

I would say the three most important features are Planner, SharePoint Integration with the file structure, and the Channel functionality. With the channel functionality, we can create and manage people, including external users.

There are two topics I'd like to address regarding Microsoft Teams software. First, it is programmed in Electron, which, in my opinion, makes it sluggish. Improving the performance and reducing high CPU utilization would be a great enhancement. 

Secondly, in terms of functionality, I would like to see support for multi-user or multiple windows for the File structure. Currently, this can only be done through the browser, and you need to switch accounts to access different windows. Additionally, better support for working with multiple tenants is an ongoing issue.

We've been an early adopter of Microsoft Teams. I've been using it since the platform was developed. So, it's been around 15 years, more or less.

We currently use the latest version.

It is a stable solution. Our entire company operates on this platform, and it has proven to be quite stable. Currently, around 70 end-users are working with Microsoft Teams.

For our scenarios, scalability is quite high. We mainly set up infrastructure for small and medium corporate clients, so we use the public cloud. We have not faced any scalability issues for up to 20 users, which is the maximum size of clients we typically serve. So, for our specialization, there haven't been any scalability concerns.

The initial setup was okay. For me, as a technical guy, it's easy.

Within a day, we are able to configure everything. Then, there is domain setup, which may take a little time to propagate the domain and other settings because we are configuring clients with websites. So, in general, the configuration takes about two days, and the clients are up and running.

We primarily sell the packages we receive from Microsoft to our customers, including email services and other features. From my perspective, the pricing is totally okay.

We also use Slack but primarily we are more of a Microsoft-based company.

We heavily use Microsoft Teams. Moreover, it's interesting that Salesforce acquired Slack. We do use Slack internally for some occasions. But, in general, most of our clients in corporate environments prefer Microsoft Teams. So, we have a clear preference for flexibility with Microsoft Teams.

Microsoft Teams is definitely worth adopting. It's a great way to start digitalizing your company and enabling remote work. Without this tool, it's challenging to operate efficiently. There are alternative solutions like Slack, but they are not as compatible with the broader Microsoft ecosystem. With Microsoft Teams, everything integrates seamlessly. You can access files and collaborate through both desktop and mobile applications.

Overall, I'd rate it an eight out of ten because a few points need improvement. Firstly, the CPU utilization can be quite high during calls, which drains the laptop battery quickly. Secondly, there is some sluggishness and delays that can be frustrating. Lastly, working with multiple tenants can be tedious and should be resolved. 

Our primary use case for Microsoft Teams is chat and meetings. We also utilize Teams to access files through SharePoint and OneDrive, form Teams groups, and conduct meetings. Our environment includes an on-premises deployment and approximately 250 users, with most using it daily and a small number using it weekly.

The platform has facilitated our communication and collaboration, especially in a remote or hybrid work environment. It has streamlined our access to shared files and improved our ability to conduct meetings and collaborate on projects.

We particularly value the platform's integration with SharePoint and OneDrive for file access, chat, and meeting functionalities. These features enhance our ability to collaborate efficiently and maintain seamless team communication.

They could enhance the product's stability and integration features.

We have been using Microsoft Teams for more than one year.

I rate the platform's stability as a seven out of ten. We have encountered issues such as repairing Outlook profiles and reinstalling Office for some users.

Microsoft Teams' scalability is seven out of ten.

We previously used Skype for meetings and video calls. We switched to Microsoft Teams for enhanced collaboration capabilities and better integration with other Microsoft products.

The initial setup process was easy and took a few days to complete.

We took the help of our internal team for the implementation.

The product is expensive.

Before implementing Microsoft Teams, organizations should ensure they have a clear understanding of their use case and the integration capabilities required. Proper planning and deployment can significantly enhance the overall experience.

I rate it an eight out of ten.