Skype for Business Reviews

I use this solution primarily for my consulting business. It enables me to keep in touch with clients via conference calls, video conferencing, desktop sharing and more.

The audio and the screenshot sharing is quite strong.

I think sometimes the connectivity needs improvement. Sometimes people have connectivity issues. Once you are running, it's terrific. But, there are unexpected dropouts occasionally. The reliability is not 100%. For example, we had a call today which started great, and then suddenly there were several participants that dropped out of the call due to connectivity.

I also think that it would be great to have a drag-and-drop feature during a call. 

Additionally, the screen sharing is really good. It would be nice to draw notes for screen sharing. This would especially be nice with Touch Pros.

There are some issues with stability during phone calls. Sometimes the connectivity drops, and it is frustrating.

We are small scale, with a small number of users. I do not know how it would handle very large numbers of users.

The Microsoft tech support are very good. They get back to you. I log a support call, and I usually have someone on the phone within a half an hour, so it is pretty good. 

Implementation and setup were pretty straightforward. It took us a half an hour. We did not need any expertise to get it running at all.

The pricing is really good. It is quite affordable because it came with our Office 365. It is on a per-user license, which is nice. I quite like that they have made it very granular with all of their licensing.  I get a feeling that smaller organizations can interact with bigger organizations in a more global way by using this service. It is leveling the playing field.

I looked at GoToMeetings. It is a good solution, and it has a few nice features. Skype for Business has better video and audio quality.

If you have Office 365, you should give it a "go" and try it!

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. 

I use Skype for Business for communication.

The most valuable feature of Skype for Business is overall it is an okay solution.

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

Skype for Business is not stable.

The scalability of Skype for Business is not very good.

We have approximately 10 to 15 users using this solution in my organization.

Skype for Business is easy to use and we did not need to contact the support.

I previously used Microsoft Messenger, which is now merged into Skype for Business.

We have 10 engineers and managers that do the deployment and support of solutions.

Our company pays for a license for us to use the solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Skype for Business a six out of ten.

We use Skype for all of our video conference purposes.

Skype for Business and video conferencing makes it easier to work from home.

The most valuable feature is stability.

The quality of calls has to be improved. I don't know whether it is a server problem that is taking away from the quality, but I have found that it is sometimes poor.

We have had trouble with scalability when trying to host large meetings.

We have been using Skype for Business for close to three years.

Stability is good but there are issues with call quality.

I would rate scalability average because I have found that there is an upper limit to the number of people that can be added to a conference. I'm not sure whether it is depending on the license that my organization has, but I do find that scalability is an issue in a large conference scenario.

It is used across our organization, with close to 15,000 or 16,000 users.

Our in-house team is responsible for technical support, although if they cannot handle the problem then they contact Skype. When this has happened, our problems have been resolved very fast.

I have been receiving meeting invitations from outside of our organization using other solutions, such as Webex. When I attend those meetings I use their software.

Our in-house IT group pre-installed this solution for me. They also handle our support.

I would rate this 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.

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.