Webex Reviews

One of the best things about Webex which I liked was that it was simple and to the point. It separated its video conferencing capabilities from other extra capabilities, so you had two different products for the virtual meetings and for collaboration. This separation, these different products, made it easy to do what you wanted to do, and to get to the point of what you wanted to do.

The only reason why we could not stay with Webex was because they didn't have a data center in the African region. There were latency issues as well, so we couldn't continue using the tool. These are its areas for improvement. Other than these issues, there's no other area for improvement, because Webex is good the way it is.

Having a data center in the African region will help improve the latency issues, without incurring additional costs. There is a way that you can improve the latency issues, but you have to buy hardware from Cisco to put into your data center. Not a lot of companies would like to do that.

I've used Webex a year ago, for six months.

We found the stability of this solution satisfying.

We were satisfied with the scalability of Webex.

My rating for Cisco tech support is ten out of ten. Bruno, who handled our issues, was top-notch. Anything we needed, Bruno was on top of it. He was top-notch, so 100%, it's a ten out of ten.

The initial setup and deployment of Webex was easy and straightforward. It was on point, and there were no issues.

I evaluated Microsoft Teams.

We used an open-source license for Webex.

We had 2,500 users of Webex. The meetings we had using it had a maximum of 2,500 users.

I'm rating Webex a ten out of ten, functionality-wise.

We use Webex for virtual meetings. 

Webex's main feature is you get 1,000 participants per meeting by default and can join from 75 meeting units. You don't have to buy additional licenses.

I've been using Webex for 14 years. 

Webex is very global. Cisco developed it, and the guy who founded Zoom was part of Webex before Cisco acquired it. 

Webex support is absolutely great.

The requirements are the same as Zoom. It's all about the same. We take the customer's order and get a provisioning form. They just have to enter whatever URL they want. It's something like abcd.webex.com. They will be the admin, and we will take the email they give us. We will put that in, and once I have provisioned it, he gets a mail saying it is done and we call them to say it's ready.

He gets the email and clicks on that link to set up his password. Once he has set up his password, he can start administering and doing whatever he wants. For example, he can add the rest of the users. 

Earlier, Webex was relatively expensive. However, now that there is more competition in the market, they have lowered the price and added more features to match Zoom.

Cisco comes up with new updates and features every month. More features, and now they have acquired some companies and put together some features that others don't have. They acquired Slido and integrated some of its features.

I rate Webex 10 out of 10. Webex is good. I deployed it at a bank just five ago, and I'm expecting another order for Webex tomorrow. Webex has huge customers because they were already there in the enterprise space. 

Zoom entered into the commercial space for end-users. It's more of a solution for single users for training classes or music centers and all that. Cisco is not in that space. Cisco is the enterprise space. We got an order for 50 licenses for city governments in India yesterday.

WebEx Integration to Outlook helps our users to schedule audio conference meetings with a push of a button. It is easy to use. This product enables scheduling of the audio bridge with random conference codes.

I don’t have an example to share. This is basically a cost avoidance solution at this time. In the future it may change the way the organization functions which we support, as soon as they drive more adoption of video and web collaboration available with CWMS.

CWMS on-premises solution does not integrate either with CMR nor with Jabber as of yet. There is no video integration with other Cisco endpoints such as DX80, DX650, or the new Cisco IP Phones 8845 or 8865 video phones. These are the areas where it could improve.

I have used this solution for more than 18 months.

There is an issue with MR2 that was fixed with a special hot fix or MR3. If you host or join an audio bridge only by phone, the meeting never ends. However, after reaching two concurrent meetings, you are not able to start a new meeting.

The CWMS large deployment is limited to 2,000 concurrent participants. There is no way to increase this limit by using the same website. A new website name and additional resources are required in order to expand; this is not easy to support.

I would give the technical support a 8/10 rating.

They started using MeetingPlace and followed the path to upgrade to WebEx on-premises as Cisco acquired MeetingPlace.

The setup was quite straightforward.

It all depends on what your needs are. Employ this solution for only the US audio conference when you already have Cisco Workspace Licensing, then it makes sense. I don’t know what TCO would be if you need this for the international audio conference and if you don’t have the Cisco IP telephone or if you are using the Cisco user licensing.

We did not evaluate other options.

Take into consideration your user needs, what user experience you want to deliver, and of course how this solution will play with your existing unified or non-communications ecosystem.

We use the solution to hold conferences with customers.

The important feature is breakout sessions. We can create a breakout session if we want to hold a conference and make a room only for some people at the meeting.

The solution could make it easier to share the files with the customer.

I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten.

Technical support is good.

Positive

I have used Microsoft Team before. I prefer Microsoft settings because we can create and use Microsoft online. It's easier to share the files with the customer. 

The initial setup is easy.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

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

I use the solution in my company to call our clients and manage areas such as business collaborations and webinars.

The most valuable features of the solution revolve around stability and performance. The average networking speed offered by the product is good.

Some concerns are raised by the company's team when it comes to the screen portion of the tool. There is a need to hire engineers to deal with the aforementioned issue.

I have experience with Webex.

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

The team of administrators in my company deals with the company's support team.

One person can handle the product's initial setup phase. The initial setup phase doesn't require much time.

Mostly, I use Webex Client. I downloaded the solution from Webex's site. In general, I use Webex Enterprise Edition.

There is a need to pay the licensing charges to use Webex Enterprise Edition.

The product has simplified the remote work in our company, especially when we have to have client meetings and there is a need to add our internal team members who are working remotely.

The video quality, screen, and interface offered by the product are good.

From my side, I would recommend the product to others.

The product's security features seem good, but I don't know much about them.

The conference quality offered by the tool is good.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

Webex greatly improves our team's collaboration by being our main communication tool and meeting platform, helping us work effectively regardless of location.

The chat and meeting scheduling features in Webex are most valuable for our team's productivity. The video quality during remote meetings is quite good, enhancing our communication and collaboration.

There is room for improvement in the chat history and search functionality in Webex, making it easier to find past conversations and commands by keywords.

I have been using Webex for about three years.

I would rate the stability of Webex as a ten out of ten.

Around 1,000 users in our company use Webex. I find it easy to scale since we have been able to scale it smoothly as our usage increases.

I prefer Teams over Webex because it integrates better with the other tools we use. In terms of features and functionalities, they are similar, as far as I know.

I would rate the Webex user interface and ease of use at around seven out of ten in terms of complexity.

Overall, I would rate Webex as an eight out of ten. It is a great product.

I use the solution in my company for meetings and training. The tool has a lot of good features, including screen sharing features, and it also provides a good user experience.

Webex is a very demanding application, so it requires a very heavy bandwidth. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement in the product. The pros of the product overshadow the product's cons.

I have been using Webex for five years.

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

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

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

I rate the product's initial setup phase a two on a scale of one to ten, where ten points mean it is very difficult to deploy.

The product's initial setup is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a few minutes.

Webex is a cheaply priced tool.

Compared to the other products in the market, I feel Webex is better.

The video quality offered by the product is very good for our company's remote meetings.

The product is very flexible, and it can be integrated easily with other platforms. The product integrates very well with LMS software products.

I don't know if any maintenance is required for the product.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

We use Webex for meetings. I get a meeting link, log in, and follow it. If a client update comes through, I follow the updates or postpone it for a day because I'm very busy. But otherwise, I simply follow the updates.

My company is a one-woman company, and I use it when working for a client and on a personal basis. I sometimes use Skype or a video call on WhatsApp, but that's not really a meeting platform. Those are then personal video calls.

I like that it can accommodate larger groups of listeners. I think in my client's organization, they use Webex for meetings with a larger group of listeners. I believe Skype For Business is not preferred. I think they use Webex or their own custom platform because it accommodates more users in one meeting

It would be better if it were more secure. I do expect Webex to keep up with hackers and their latest techniques.

I have been regularly using Webex for six or eight months.

Webex seems like a scalable solution. I have attended meetings with hundreds of users or hundreds of listeners. But I haven't had meetings with thousands of users in one session. Large meetings have a practical problem as people want a chance to say what they want to say, but that's an organizational thing and not a technical thing.

For me, the initial setup was very straightforward. I have been a software developer in the past, so give me software, and I will install it and use it. 

I implemented this solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Webex an eight.