Webex Reviews

I use Webex for having meetings in the cloud. For example, sometimes I use it for technical reviews with my team, and sometimes, I used it for education.

The most valuable feature is the remote control. I can share my screen, or control other PCs, which are very good features. I can do all of this from home without having to travel.

Webex is easy to use, even for people who are just learning it. They can join meetings or share content with the click of a link.

This solution would be much better if we could install an endpoint and have centralized management. This would allow me to subscribe, push an endpoint to the client, and then control these points.

I would like to see the inclusion of security agents, for example from McAfee or Symantec, which can scan the communication for threats. This would help avoid problems if a user has malware on their machine. Webex would also be able to scan for malicious files.

I have been using Webex for three years.

The stability is very good and Cisco is doing a great job with it. We use it on a regular basis.

This is a scalable product. In the past three years, I have not faced any issues related to scalability.

I have been in touch with Cisco support and they are very good. For enterprise-level organizations, I find them very good.

I have also used GoToMeeting and Zoom. I found that Webex is easier to use than these other products.

This cloud-based solution is very easy to install, with only a single click.

My advice is simply that if this product fits the requirements then people should just start using it. It is very easy to use and can't be complicated, even for non-professional users. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for multiple purposes, including collaborative meetings and online education through web events, seminars, practical sessions, and lab sessions.

The solution provides a secure environment for meetings. Along with this, its feature for conducting exams works the best. In addition, it helps the instructor to monitor student engagement during online educational sessions.

They should integrate the solution with multiple hardware vendors.

I have been using the solution for more than ten years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability ten out of ten.

Technical support is optional for the solution as it is never out of connectivity or has latency issues.

I have used Zoom and Microsoft Teams before. In comparison, Webex provides additional features and a standard license policy.

The solution's initial setup process is straightforward. 

The solution is low-cost for a hybrid model.

It is a unique solution. I rate it ten out of ten.

I am a reseller and use Webex to host calls with my clients and other associates within my enterprise.

I enjoy being able to make video calls.

I would like the next release to be more user-friendly. 

I have been using Webex for about six years.

The solution is stable.

I do not consider Webex to be too scalable.

The initial setup was easy but it was difficult to integrate it within my environment.

I had a hard time integrating this solution within my environment. I prefer Microsoft Teams over Webex.

Using it anywhere on any devices.

Having the quickest meetings ever.

Overall collaborations.

I have used it for one year.

No issues.

No issues.

No issues.

A 10 out of 10.

A 10 out of 10.

Jabber. It was less flexible, which is why we switched.

The initial setup was easy and quick.

It was implemented through a vendor team. I would give them a 10 out of 10.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

We use Webex for conferencing.

The most noteworthy aspect of Webex is its quality, which I found satisfactory without any notable issues.

In terms of features, it would be beneficial for Webex to focus on improving its chat functionality to make it more user-friendly. Additionally, enhancing communication operations to create a friendlier user experience would be advantageous. Other individuals who have tried using it faced challenges when attempting to share content with third parties during conversations or meetings.

I have been using Webex for approximately five years.

We encountered connectivity issues that could have stemmed from our network, the internet service provider (ISP), or other factors. It seemed to be an isolated incident, and I didn't have the opportunity to connect with tech support to diagnose the exact problem. It could have been related to an update or an issue with Webex itself. However, the problem was eventually resolved. While it was a significant concern for someone else, I had not personally received any complaints about it prior to that occurrence.

We have three people in my group that have used Webex.

Although there is internal technical support available, I didn't escalate the issue as it was resolved almost immediately. The presence of an active internal technical support team played a key role in swiftly fixing the problem.

I have a preference for alternative tools. Regarding conferences, Webex is acceptable. I want to be honest with you about this. Connecting on Webex is actually easy. I would consider it to be on par with Zoom in terms of overall quality. However, I'm aware that some external users from the company's perspective have encountered certain issues that have hindered their conversations. Honestly, they weren't particularly enthusiastic about this solution. When I need to communicate with these external customers through Webex, they tend to choose another tool. This doesn't inspire much confidence in me, but I understand it's a personal matter. Perhaps the design could be improved, but that's also just my personal opinion. Apart from that, I believe Webex has all the necessary features. As a regular Zoom user, I simply prefer to stick with Zoom based on my own experiences and preferences. Additionally, I find it more useful to use Zoom for both personal and team purposes.

For my ideal solution, I would suggest taking the best features from various tools. For instance, I would incorporate Slack's messaging capabilities and Zoom's audio-video functionality. That combination would be perfect for me. If it were possible to also include elements from other platforms like Telegram and Webex, it would further enhance the overall solution.

The solution requires maintenance. 

I rate Webex a seven out of ten.

We are using Webex for meetings.

The most valuable feature of Webex is ease to use.

The GUI of Webex should be improved. The connectivity for putting people inside the meetings or entering meetings is to be improved. 

When you mute or unmute someone in Webex it causes a tone or a sound that can be distracting. For example, in Microsoft Teams when someone is muted or unmuted it is silent. When we have a meeting with 100 people the noises are too much. Webex needs to reduce the number of noises activated by using the solution.

I have been using Webex for approximately two years.

We have approximately 100 people in m organization using this solution.

I have not contacted the support from Webex.

I have previously used Microsoft Teams and Zoom. 

Microsoft Teams and Zoom are better than Webex, I have not seen anything special features in Webex.

The setup of Webex is simple.

I have seen Webex improve over the past year. My most recent meeting using Webex was good. Before Webex was the worst meeting platform I used. Every time I went into a meeting, I hang up there for approximately 10 minutes sometimes till I was inside the meeting. Zoom or Microsoft Teams did not have this issue, I was quickly inside the meeting.

We mostly use Microsoft Teams in my organization. 

I rate Webex a seven out of ten.

We are using the latest version for Mac.

We primarily use the solution for meetings with coworkers. 

When the solution is used comprehensively, the hardware and camera features combine to make it better than all others I have encountered. This is because the camera moves in tandem with the person who is using it to communicate with the other participants. 

This is one of the solution's best features. I have not encountered such features with Zoom, which are essentially involve one-on-one meetings. Webex has the hardware to allow for this. 

The price should be improved significantly. The software, licenses and hardware combine to make the solution extremely expensive. 

The interconnectivity of all of the solution's facilities and functions can be more complex than that which is involved in basic configuration, when equipment, telephone extensions or other mobile apps are thrown into the mix. 

To be sure, the solution is stable. 

The solution is certainly scalable. A feature we were lacking in Mexico involved the capability to interconnect with the local telephone companies. We are talking about the prospect of increasing the usage. During this year and last, we increased the use of any kind of non-contact communication using Webex or Zoom, the latter being preferred by some our customers who have Zoom implemented it in their companies - the reason we utilize it. However, for internal use, we exclusively utilize Webex. 

We receive good technical support from Cisco. 

We have been using Webex since I first entered the company in 2012 or 2013, as the company places a premium on fiscal solutions. It is for this reason that it adopted this technology from the outset. 

The solution combines its hardware and camera features to give it a superior edge over all others, with the camera moving in pace with the person who is communicating with other participants. I consider this to be the solution's most valuable feature and have not encountered it with Zoom, which is basically geared towards one-on-one meetings. 

The difficulty involved in the initial setup can vary. The solution is easy to configure for basic use, such as one-on-one meetings or those involving multiple parties. It is more difficult to interconnect all the facilities and functions when one adds equipment and telephone extensions or other mobile apps. 

While I do not recall how long the deployment took, the configuration of all of the functions lasted two or three days. However, there is a need to be certified by Cisco, Webex and IP telephony for this solution. 

When it comes to the deployment and maintenance, there are a couple field agents who are responsible for this. 

I cannot say for certain whether we have seen an ROI, return on our investment. 

I find the solution to be very expensive. The software, licensing and hardware add up significantly. 

I do not have the licensing figures offhand, but the prices vary with the features one wishes to add to the license. There exists the option of a free license for one-on-one or one-on-two video calls, but adding more people requires one to upgrade his license. 

The licensing fees vary with the features one utilizes, web or call conferencing incurring a basic licensing fee. An upgraded license is required if one wishes to add a mobile app or conference. There is, yet, a separate license for integrating one's computer, cell, office or desk phone. We are talking about a sort of unit for each of the features, different licensing fees applying for those which are basic, intermediate and complete. I believe these range from $120-$130 up to $700. 

I feel the solution to be very complete. 

I am a Webex customer. 

While there are 20 to 25 people making use of the solution in our organization, we also use it with another company of ours which has implemented it and this places the number in the company at around 25 to 30 people. 

Each person has a different role and is dispersed in a disparate location in the north and center of Mexico. 

I would consider the move from on-premises to cloud-based implementation to be a positive step. This makes the solution a good instrument in such countries as the United States, the UK and Germany, where there is much integration with the local cell or telephone companies. We are talking about a good investment, as it allows one to integrate his office or home phones with the solution. 

I rate Webex as a nine out of ten.