Skype for Business Reviews

Skype for Business was one of the prime tools we used to communicate with vendors. We also used it for communicating with other employees internally, within our organization.

We had a very good experience with Skype for Business. It was a helpful tool, and one of the best tools I've ever worked with. It's just that our organization is now starting to use Microsoft Teams, so people are diverted into that tool slowly and steadily. We can organize meetings and send across files on it, e.g. there are a lot of options you can use on Microsoft Teams. Both Skype for Business and Microsoft Teams have multiple advantages.

One of the best features of Skype for Business is that you can set it up on mobile phones, and you can set it up on laptops. You can connect to the tool from anywhere.

Dynamic file updating is a feature I haven't seen on Skype for Business. It's an area for improvement, e.g. I've seen that feature on Microsoft Teams, but not on this tool. If I send one file and shared it with 10 resources, for example, those 10 resources can update that file dynamically all at once, at the same time. Being able to update a file dynamically, by more than one resource, is one of the best features that isn't available on Skype for Business.

Skype for Business is a stable tool. It's just that our organization has moved to Microsoft Teams, but I found Skype for Business to be stable.

Scalability is present in Skype for Business, e.g. you can use it to participate in one-to-one chats, and you can have a call with multiple people on it. If you have an organization with 3,000 people, you can manage it very nicely on Skype for Business. The tool can also scale from 10,000 to 20,000 users. It's a scalable tool.

We have Skype for Business in our organization, and our last usage of it was six months ago.

I'm unable to comment on the initial setup of Skype for Business, because the installation was done by our IT team. Our team just used the tool. My work is on IT infrastructure, and Skype for Business is one of the communication tools that our local IT team provided to us. Our IT team took care of the installation.

Everyone in our organization used Skype for Business. Everyone was using the same thing, because there was no other option that time. Slowly and steadily, people went on to use Microsoft Teams, and I started using Zoom for meetings, because once the pandemic came in, everything was remote. Our organization wanted a tool which had better quality, or could be a better way to communicate, so we went onto Zoom and Microsoft Teams. Prior to those two tools, we used Skype for Business.

I'm rating Skype for Business seven out of ten. It's a really good solution.

I use the solution to make calls and talk to colleagues. I use it mostly to chat with people inside the company and make international calls. 

The product helps me make international calls. 

I feel that the whole look and feel of Skype should be improved, including its user-friendliness. It should also improve its scalability.  

The tool is not stable since some calls just don't get through. I would rate it a five out of ten since it doesn't happen every time. 

I would rate the solution's scalability a three out of ten. My company has 200 users for it. 

I have used Teams before. 

The product's setup is not complex and takes around three hours to complete. 

I would rate the solution a six out of ten. You can use the product without any training. However, I feel that Teams is better than Skype in terms of scalability, user experience, app integration, etc. 

Our primary use case is for virtual meetings and video communication. We also use it to send files via the group chat. I'm a data analyst and we are customers of Skype.

I think it's a good solution and provides us with a good option for virtual meetings. I've never had any problems.

The stability is sometimes a bit wobbly and could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The stability is fine but there is some room for improvement. 

We previously used Zoom and we also had an in-house messaging system developed within the company. 

I wasn't involved in the initial setup, deployment was carried out by our IT department and the company has around 150 users. 

I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

Our team of six uses the solution for virtual meetings. 

The solution is easy to use and includes the ability to text message, video and voice chat, and transfer files. 

The solution requires deployment on a Microsoft server and its performance is heavy because it consumes too many resources from the RAM. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

For our purposes, the solution works fine and we have no need to scale. 

We use a free version of the solution so we don't need specific support. If we have problems, we search Microsoft forums to find solutions. 

The setup takes a day and requires some knowledge of configuration and deployment.

We outsourced implementation to one Microsoft technician skilled in setup and deployment of the solution and other Microsoft products such as SharePoint. 

Most of the IT ecosystems in Iran use Microsoft solutions because they are free for us. We crack them and pay no fees when configuring servers, downloading packages, or using Skype. 

We also use WhatsApp and Telegram for small meetings.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

Our primary use case is for chat and we use it for internal meetings. We also have a federation between a couple of companies, so we also use it for virtual meetings across those companies that we have the federation with. It is our preferred chat and video solution nowadays. 

My last customer used it and Polycom, but Polycom was historic because of the meeting rooms. And the meeting rooms tended to be set up for Polycom, so if you were doing meetings from one meeting room to another one, then we'd switch to Polycom. Otherwise, it was Skype For Business.

The simplicity and ease of use are the most valuable features. It's so much easier and quicker than writing an email to someone and waiting for them to read it. If you actually see in Skype For Business that they're online and free, and you just put your question into there, it's a lot faster. The increase in productivity for messaging people is the number one reason for using it.

With respect to installing it in a large multinational, I find that installing it so that it gives decent performance across the company, can be a bit of black science. The ease of configuration or the lack of decent tooling to pinpoint your problems is probably its biggest issue. That's not just an issue with Skype For Business. That's pretty much across the board with unified communication systems.

What I'd really love them to provide would be an easy method of linking or connecting to other Skype For Business personnel in other companies who are also using Skype For Business without having to set up a federation. There are lots and lots of companies now using Skype For Business with other unified communications products. You can send someone a link, and then they can come into your Skype For Business meeting. We have issues trying to do Skype For Business.

I've been using this solution since 2006 when it was called Communicator. It's actually been 14 years. 

We quite often see glitches where it jitters and stuff like this, but that's all to do with the wide-area network links. I'm sure we could improve that if our unified communications guys had better tooling and understanding of the complexities. What we see is that in most companies the implementation is not optimal.

I haven't actually had to contact Microsoft support about Skype For Business related issues. Technical support with Microsoft depends upon your support contracts. If you're paying for the highest level, then it's absolutely fantastic.

You get what you pay for. The standard support contract is no worse or better than any other company. I have to say, the few times that I've had to call Microsoft with a priority support call, and the technical account manager gets put on it and keeps on top of the Microsoft side and stuff, then that goes really well. As well as you could expect it to go. I don't have any experience with Microsoft technical support when it comes down to Skype For Business.

Times in the past with respect to Azure issues that I was experiencing, I know that both the premium and the next level down, they were both absolutely fine. I always ended up talking to people that knew their stuff and when it was resolvable, it got resolved.

I definitely recommend the product. If you are in a complex distributed environment, with offices with varying levels of connection and various different bandwidths of connections and latency, that it's worth spending the extra money to get someone who really knows their stuff with respect to unified communications to set up Skype For Business across their organization. Someone that understands the pitfalls, because how your infrastructure is built is key to whether you're going to get a decent and stable experience or not.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. I would give it this rating purely because of the fact that when it gets installed across a complex environment, you really need someone who knows their stuff to install it. But once it's installed properly, it's absolutely fine. It does what it says on the tin.

We use Skype for Business for virtual meetings.

It's a good product, we like using it.

The initial setup could be simplified.

I have been using Skype for Business for approximately 10 years.

We are using the older version, but it is enough for us.

We have no problems with the stability of Skype for Business.

We have 300 users on all levels using this solution.

I have not contacted technical support.

The initial setup was not easy. You must have experience.

I completed the setup myself.

We purchased an open license.

We own the license. You can buy a license once and use it for a long time. If you do not want to upgrade or you don't need to upgrade the license, you can keep it for a long time.

This is not a solution I would recommend. We purchased the license approximately six years ago. If you are thinking about using this solution, I would recommend purchasing a new cloud-based license. They should use Teams. I would recommend Teams. Skype is outdated.

I would Skype for Business a seven out of ten.

I use Skype for Business for my office's internal communications.

The most valuable features of the solution are that it is quick and easy to use. It is a good tool for group calls.

I feel bored with the look and feel of the tool, so it should be changed.

I have been using Skype for Business for five months. I am a customer of the product.

It is a scalable solution.

Around 400 employees in my company use Skype for Business.

I never had any requirements or needed to contact the technical support team of Skype.

I have previously worked with Slack, and it was not easy to use, while Skype has been comparatively much better. Compared to Skype, Slack was only providing my company with a free trial, after the expiry of which we could not make calls.

I don't know about the time taken for the product's installation process since my company's technical team managed it.

The product's installation phase was easy.

I think that one of the technical team members was involved in the product's installation process.

The solution is deployed on the devices in our company.

There is no maintenance required for the solution.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.