Microsoft Teams Reviews

I use it for meeting prospects, current calls, and also for some apps like workflow and notes. It has been quite useful, and I find the tools and functionalities great.

Team sharing is really cool. It's great to have remote access, document sharing, and collaboration during calls and meetings. These features are excellent, and I haven't found them in other tools.

In future releases, short voice messages would be useful. Sometimes, when people are in other meetings, it would be great to leave a voice message if they're not reachable.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for the past four years. We use the latest version because it generally gets updated through backend policies.

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

There are around 500 to 600 users in my organization using this solution. 

The setup is usually done by the IT people in the organization. As an end user, we just start using the features and the product.

My advice is that Microsoft Teams is not just a tool for meetings. It offers additional features and add-on apps like WebBooks, Azure, task planner, and more. Updates are regularly provided, and you can even use Excel tools on the go.

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. If a tool provides everything I need without any issues, then it deserves the highest score. That's why I'm giving it a nine.

I have used Google Meet, Skype (the older version), and WebEx for meetings and webinars. But Microsoft Teams is quite advanced and has a lot of features.

If I compare it with Google Meet, Google Meet doesn't offer remote sessions. That is the main disadvantage compared to Google Meet.

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

We use Microsoft Teams for virtual meetings and video communication.

Microsoft Teams is an easy-to-use solution. We can use the solution for chats and viewing chat history.

I would like to get more frequent updates, and the solution’s stability could be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for two years.

I rate Microsoft Teams an eight out of ten for stability because sometimes we experience call drops. Since the bandwidth required for Microsoft Teams is huge, there can be issues of lag between video and audio.

The solution's scalability is good because there is no limitation on the number of people who can join the call simultaneously. I rate Microsoft Teams ten out of ten for scalability. Around 1,000 users are using Microsoft Teams in our organization.

It is easy to set up Microsoft Teams. The solution took around 15 to 20 minutes to deploy.

The solution's deployment can be done in-house. My organization had subscribed to Microsoft Teams, and I logged in with my organization's credentials.

I use the latest version of Microsoft Teams. The solution is deployment on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Microsoft Teams to other users.

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

We use Microsoft Teams for normal SharePoint activity. We have offices in the US and some in India, and we do our regular team meetings on Microsoft Teams.

All basic features of Microsoft Teams are good enough. The solution has features like good voice clarity, good video quality, and recording. We can set up the Microsoft Team's settings within seconds, and connectivity is also good. We can connect with anybody, including our customers.

Microsoft Teams has a limitation on the number of people, which could be increased. The voice quality sometimes is not good, but it could be because of internet issues.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for about a year or so.

It could be because of internet issues, but the screen often freezes off. We have Microsoft Teams meetings at least thrice a week. Throughout some 10 to 20 meetings, the screen freezes off one or two times. Subsequently, leaving the meeting and coming back takes time.

I rate Microsoft Teams between eight and nine out of ten for stability.

The solution's scalability is good enough for us. We have never faced any issues with the solution's scalability. We use Microsoft Teams about three to four times a week. We use it every alternate day for about half an hour, two hours, or one and a half hours. We have never faced any issues, and even if it's a continuous three hours meeting, there's no stoppage in the service. Currently, 15 users are using Microsoft Teams in our organization, and we may scale up to about 30 to 35 users after some time.

We use SharePoint from Microsoft. Earlier, we used to use Google Meet. Although Google Meet was free, it had a time limit of 45 minutes. We used to use another product from an Indian-based company with its own data center. It is a free VC software, but we stopped using it because of some teething issues.

The solution's initial setup is quite okay and very user-friendly.

We are IT and system integrators ourselves. Although we're a small company, our organization has a technical team who does the deployment. We didn't have to take any assistance from outside.

My technical team remotely deployed Microsoft Teams. From a user perspective, if I had to connect or have a Microsoft Teams meeting with any of my vendors, customers, or internally, I know how to do it, and it's quite simple.

Microsoft Teams is expensive compared to other solutions. We bought the entire suite of products, including Office, Outlook, and Teams.

Microsoft Teams is deployed on-cloud in our organization. Microsoft Teams is an expensive product. Since we are a micro and small mid sized company, we have to pay more cost. Big banks and big enterprise customers pay half the price of what we pay because their number of users is more. If the company is very big, the solution's cost reduces substantially.

Microsoft Teams is a very standard platform. Many of our customers are using Microsoft. Google is also quite good, and Google is much easier to use and user-friendly than Microsoft Teams.

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

We use the product for meetings. 

I like the tool's screen share feature. 

The product needs to improve its security. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

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

I would rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has 40-60 users for the product. We use the product at least on a weekly basis. 

I find Zoom easier in the browser version. 

The tool's setup is straightforward and not technical. 

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

I would rate the tool a ten out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Teams to chat with and call our teammates. We also use the solution to upload documents.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Teams is its video calling feature which makes it easier to work on the solution.

Microsoft Teams could work faster if set up on other devices like cell phones.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for three to four years.

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

I rate Microsoft Teams a nine out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

People should have training about the solution because there are a lot of apps in Microsoft Teams that you can work on.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Teams a nine out of ten.

I think we're use Microsoft Teams for almost everything when it comes to communications. When I call my colleagues, I no longer using the phone. Because I use Teams so much, I picked up the phone the other day and it was strange — It was like it was the first time I picked up the phone. I use Teams as a phone. Even on my smartphone, I call people using Teams.

We're using Teams to call people to set meetings, record meetings, share documents — all communication now goes through Teams. We create groups to share our documents and update them live. It is really very practical and collaborative.

It is improving our means of communication and I think in the future will encourage users to communicate better because it is fun to use and powerful.

The features that I like the most are the features we have now. I like every aspect of it. It is easy to use. It's on your phone, so it is mobile. You can respond without answering if you have a call or message. You can send emoticons so people know you have gotten their message. This type of response is very quick and doesn't leave the other party waiting. Those features are just like what you might do in WhatsApp or Messenger on Facebook. It is very familiar to anyone using those products.

One thing that we are looking to deploy — and we are testing it now — is to send and track kudos. We want to implement this new feature on a worldwide basis to thank team members for being good participants. 

We work directly with Microsoft to provide feedback on the product and what we would like to see as improvements. I discover a new feature every day, so they're really working to develop it very quickly. 

I would like also to have a feature where we create a worldwide group to act as a social media hub. The difference between that and groups is that it would be separate from all the other groups. I don't want it included in my Teams because I will use it in a different way. I can see the activity of other teams or individuals who are not on my teams. Because I'm using the product extensively and have many teams, I think it is an important addition to be able to organize groups in different ways — and I have put in that request with IS. 

I've heard some people complain and say, "Oh it's not working with me," but I never had any issue with Teams. I use it all the time and it is stable. It opens immediately when I open my computer, it's on my phone and it sends me notifications. 

I have calls with people on it. Sometimes I even record video calls. The only time I have had any issues is when the network is not working well — maybe in high load times — but this happens with every means of communication like WhatsApp or other solutions that depend on the network. It isn't a problem with the package it is a problem with the network.

Our company has about 14,000 employees, but we are not all using the intranet. We are an industrial company and we have people working in manufacturing and they don't have access to computers all the time. 

As far as scalability, we would like to have the ability to use the product off-site. That is, we want to be able to have remote people use Teams with us internally. This is the only thing I've heard that's posing a problem with scaling. 

I have not directly had any experience with the Microsoft technical support team for Teams because we have an IS (Internet Services) group. If we open a ticket, the IS department is the group who will contact support.

Before we tried using Teams, we were using Skype. Now we are only using Teams because it is a more complete and business-oriented tool. 

I was not directly involved in the deployment. 

Our implementation was done by our own IS team.

My advice to people who are considering this solution is that you have to be patient at the beginning. People might think it is too complicated or that it looks too complicated at the beginning. As a first time user, I remember feeling like I didn't understand anything. You have to be patient and play around with it until you become familiar with the different features. For example, there are channels within a group. If you are added to several groups and you start getting alerts, you may not know which channel it is or which group. It is a lot for a first time user to digest. It is not as straightforward as WhatsApp when it comes to groups.

What we have seen is that when we communicate our requests to Microsoft, we are getting back responses with the features we have asked for. There are many features that we request and we discover they are available in just a few days. Either many companies are making the same requests or Microsoft is answering our request, but the product is evolving quickly. 

On a scale from one to ten, when one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Microsoft Teams as an eight. While I like the product a lot and I use it all the time, there is room for improvement.

We use it for daily or scheduled meetings.

Teams enhances collaboration within our team and with our customers. While we've had positive experiences overall, one issue we've encountered is inconsistent remote access through Teams. However, for field meetings and estimations, it functions effectively.

The video conferencing capability has significantly enhanced our remote meetings, making them more productive. It allows people from different locations to convene at a central point, enabling seamless sharing of views, solutions, and discussions without the need for physical travel. This efficient communication method enables us to address various matters and reach solutions in minimal time.

One of the most valuable aspects is the ability to record sessions on Teams, which is a beneficial feature. It allows for reviewing meetings afterward, ensuring that any missed details can be revisited and understood, contributing to better meeting outcomes.

The most valuable feature for our team's productivity in Teams is remote access, particularly because many of our clients are located remotely. This feature allows us to efficiently address issues without the need to travel to other countries or regions. Instead, we can initiate remote sessions through Teams to troubleshoot and resolve problems promptly, enhancing our ability to provide support regardless of geographical barriers.

At times, we encounter difficulties with remote access through Teams, which requires improvement. Access to the target server may not always function correctly when accessed remotely.

We have been working with it for last three years.

It provides good stability capabilities. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Scalability is contingent upon the projects at hand. As projects expand, so does the team size. This scalability is influenced by the number of global projects and remote sites. Additionally, it correlates with the client base; as clients increase, more personnel are required to support them. We have a team of two to three individuals, but as our business grows and client numbers increase, we will accordingly augment our team size to accommodate the expansion. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Our marketing team frequently utilizes this tool, often engaging with clients on a daily basis through multiple meetings. In contrast, our technical team typically uses it for work approximately three times a week.

We previously utilized Zoom, but frequent interruptions and disconnections prompted us to transition to Teams.

The initial setup process is straightforward, requiring only a few simple steps. Setting up Teams and scheduling meetings can be easily done with minimal effort. I would rate it eight out of ten.

The deployment time may range from one to three months. Our deployment process involves setting up database, application, and web servers. However, we're currently facing a challenge as the Network Access Control service is unavailable on any cloud platform. Our solution relies on NAC for initial authentication, followed by communication with middleware before completing the cycle. Due to the absence of NAC on cloud platforms, we're exploring alternatives. Suggestions have been made to run the NAC function on-premises and then deploy the solution on the cloud. However, management is hesitant until a cloud-based NAC solution is available. This delay has stalled the project's progress despite initial work starting six months ago.

We've deployed the project with our in-house technical team, not relying on third-party assistance. Multiple teams were involved in the deployment process, including the development team and PMO team. Each team member played a crucial role, with approximately five to ten individuals participating in each deployment phase. Two people are sufficient for maintenance.

The ROI we've observed primarily stems from the significant time savings achieved through Teams. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The price is relatively high. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We consistently advise our clients to utilize Teams. Although some clients may request Zoom meetings, we promptly suggest using Teams for its reliability and seamless connectivity. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use Microsoft Teams for meetings.

The solution's stability is quite good, and it doesn't crash and freeze up when you have a large number of users.

The solution should include features like scripting, meeting summarization, and automated notes.

The solution should include a very simple way of capturing transcription without necessarily taking a full recording or any AI product that allows you to note what is going on in the meeting automatically. This would help you have personal notes about the meeting summary that would help you prepare minutes and actions to share with the participants.

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

We use the solution daily in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

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

I previously used different solutions like Zoom and Google Meet.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup a two out of ten.

Microsoft Teams is deployed on the cloud in our organization. We use Microsoft Teams as a stand-alone solution in our organization. Microsoft is not very good at keeping your identity separate. Microsoft does all sorts of things to tie you in rather than just allow you to use non-Microsoft tools, which makes it difficult. I would not recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Teams a four out of ten.