Zoom Reviews

We use Zoom to connect with our customers, to hold sales sessions and pre-technical sessions.

The solution is stable and scalable. 

Zoom lacks dashboards, I think more could be included. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

We previously used Teams. 

The initial setup is straightforward, we did it in-house and currently have five users in the company. 

We pay an annual license fee. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Zoom is used day-to-day like a mobile phone, so you can connect with your audience or customer from the other side of the screen, though there's nothing extraordinary about it.

A voice chatting feature could be added to Zoom, and its screen sharing feature could be improved, though some users will find more value in these changes more than I would.

I've been using Zoom since the pandemic, so more than two years.

Zoom is very stable. There are times it isn't as stable, but that could be the fault of your internet connection, not the fault of the application.

Zoom is scalable because they offer different packages. For example, I'm paying for Zoom, particularly a professional license for one person. I only use the professional, personal license, but you can scale up for a team or for an organization and pay for a different license type or package.

Zoom is very easy to set up.

If I had to rate the cost of this solution with one being the worst and ten being the best, I'll rate it a ten.

I evaluated Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, and GoToMeeting.

I'm a partner of UiPath. I'm an implementer and I'm also a user of some of UiPath's products. I don't have hands-on experience with UiPath Process Mining, because here in Mexico, it is not the common. Not all companies have well-implemented ERP software such as SAP, Oracle, or Microsoft, so when you put or connect the process miner, you'll find nothing in the results. I know what a process miner is, but it's not very common here.

I have here Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, but all the robots work the same, and the only change is the flavor. All the robots have the same capacity and the same level of trustworthiness. The only difference between UiPath and the rest of the competitors is that UiPath's first robot: the Attended Robot, is cheaper than other robots. Its price is the only real difference in the market.

I only specialize in RPA (robotic process automation).

I also use other tools, e.g. web meeting solutions such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams. I have an account in Zoom.

Zoom is deployed on-premises in our organization. It's on-premise: on every laptop and on every desktop.

My usage of Zoom is low, e.g. I just use it to talk with two or three people on the other side of the cloud. I have not used it for other purposes. I know it has a webcast or video webinar feature, and it's not common for me to use that. Other users may see the difference with using Zoom vs another application and be able to mention valuable features of Zoom, but in my case, I'm unable to. I also don't have any idea on what could be improved in Zoom.

I never had to call technical support.

My partner recommended Zoom to me, but when you have to talk or connect with other people, you'll always say to connect through Zoom, Teams, Google Meet, or GoToMeeting. Zoom is recommended by everyone, though, and always comes out of everyone's mouth. Everybody knows Zoom.

My overall rating for this product is an eight out of ten. For its cost, I'll rate it a ten.

I haven't given much thought on how my rating for this solution could increase from an eight to a ten because Zoom's current use for me is just to connect with people and nothing more.

I use Zoom for hosting and attending webinars, Q&A, attending classes, and hosting online meetings. I use it for both my personal and business needs. Our organization has approximately 150 people that use Zoom.

Zoom's content shareability and chat support are the most valuable features.

Zoom could use more background options.

I have been using Zoom for two years.

Zoom is a stable product.

Zoom is a scalable solution.

Zoom is cloud based so the setup is straightforward and can be done without support.

I implemented Zoom myself.

We will continue to use Zoom. As the number of employees grow so will our usage of Zoom. I would rate Zoom a 9 out of 10.

My primary use case for Zoom is for contacting clients, suppliers, and even colleagues. We were working at a distance with some people.

One of the most valuable advantages of Zoom is that it is a bit easier to install than Microsoft Teams or WebEx by Cisco, for example. Another advantage of Zoom is that it is easier to link a person that is not a Zoom user than it is with WebEx.

Overall, Zoom is a very mature platform. The only issues and glitches we have every had with it were related to Wi-Fi quality. For example, we can run into problems when a colleague is working on a low-quality Wi-Fi connection. Also, we try to use headsets in our meetings and this can create a problem, but that again is not an issue with the platform itself. 

We have had some quality and lagging issues with video regardless of connection quality. We would experience things like poor audio quality or a choppy connection, but that was with older versions of Zoom. 

I started using Zoom 10 years ago. 

Zoom is fairly stable.

We pay a per-seat monthly fee for keeping the license.

We use Zoom for virtual meetings.

The solution could improve by being more secure.

I have been using Zoom for approximately one year.

We have approximately 10 people in my organization that use this solution on a regular basis.

There is no installation, you can give someone a link to the chat and they can access the chat through the link.

We have subscribed to a package for Zoom and it is a monthly payment.

I would recommend this solution to others

I rate Zoom an eight out of ten.

We use Zoom and Teams for different corporate communications functions. Zoom is our standalone platform for meetings. We use Teams for internal chatting and when we need some integrated functions. 

I like Zoom because it's a very simple program. We have more success using Zoom with clients, partners, and everybody else. Everybody seems to be able to get Zoom. Some people struggle with Teams.

I think Zoom is more user-friendly than most of its competitors. It's simple. I think Teams can be more restrictive.

Zoom isn't well integrated with anything else. Obviously, it's integrated enough to be able to set an appointment or schedule a Zoom meeting.

I've been using Zoom for two years.

I have no issues with Zoom at all. I would rate Zoom best, Teams next, and Webex is a pain.

I haven't used Zoom for large meetings, but I've seen calls with hundreds of people.

Zoom setup is the simplest.

I'm always in calls through Zoom and other platforms. We use ours and then we use other people's as well. It depends on who sets up the meeting. It's really for client meetings and management meetings or board meetings. Anything that is not in-person we typically will use Zoom for.

The solution is stable.

It's easy to use and at this point, it's certainly ubiquitous. It's everywhere. Everyone seems to have experience with it.

The solution is scalable. 

It's secure enough.

In terms of connectivity, we've had issues, specifically this week. There were several instances where we couldn't connect into a meeting just on video and then couldn't even dial-in. Something was not working. It was like that for a good two days the last time it happened. We had to work around the issue.

From a professional use point of view, it really just needs to work more solidly. It's not more features that they need. Rather, they could increase the stability and solve some of the sync problems they have with video and audio.

I've used Zoom for probably about five years at this point.

There are a few stability problems. For example, occasionally, there's a sync problem between the video and the audio.

The scalability is good. It's pretty solid. I understand how complex these things are on the back end. I haven't seen it fail due to too many people being on it. 

Everyone uses it. It's quite extensively used. We have about 100 people in our organization that leverage it regularly.

I've never contacted technical support. When we have had connectivity issues, I report them. Every time it didn't connect, I would send a message to let them understand the frequency of the issue.

I also use Teams to a certain degree.

Even with Teams coming on as strongly as it is, Zoom is still the standard. What I'll often hear people say is, "on Zoom, I can do this. How do I do it here?" Zoom sets the standard for a lot of platforms. 

I work for a private equity firm and they're very concerned about security. For a while, we used WebEx due to the fact that it was secure. However, they were just were so far behind and there were problems with that. In the end, more often than not, you'd almost expect problems with the WebEx side. Zoom was better in that regard. Zoom is able to actually encrypt the meetings from end-to-end, point-to-point.

I don't handle anything related to costs or licensing. I don't know what the actual pricing is on the product.

I work as a consultant for a private equity firm. I'm just a customer and an end-user.

I'm up to date with the latest version at the moment.

For the most part, the solution just works. However, when it doesn't work, it really doesn't work.

A lot of people are finding success with Microsoft Teams. If a company already has Teams, if they're at a certain subscription level within Microsoft, they get Teams for free. If they're a company that has enough scale, then Teams will just come along with their subscription. Teams works well enough and has other factors and features from a collaboration standpoint. That makes it pretty compelling.

That being said, what I'd recommend is if people are a Microsoft house and they have a certain level of their subscription before they invest in Zoom, see if they can't address their needs with Teams, otherwise, they might be spending money where they don't need to.

I would rate the solution at a six out of ten.

We use Zoom for video conferencing and meetings.

Zoom is easy to use and does not consume very much in terms of resources.

Zoom should continue to add new features to the product. When a new feature is added, I appreciate it.

We have been using Zoom for the past year.

Zoom is a stable solution, unlike Webex, which is not.

At the company we're working with, which is a major financial institution, there are thousands of people using Zoom.

I attend Zoom meetings every morning.

I have not been in contact with Zoom technical support.

I have experience with both Zoom and Webex, and I prefer Zoom.

Webex is what we were using prior to Zoom and although Webex is still used in the organization, my team relies on Zoom. For internal communication, Webex is our primary tool for virtual meetings. Since other companies more often use Zoom, that's what we use to speak with people outside of the company.

Resource-wise, Webex is much heavier and consumes more resources than Zoom. With Webex, my computer sounds loud because the CPU utilization is higher, it gets hotter, and the fan is louder.

Webex is not as stable as Zoom.

The initial setup is simple. You only need to press the Next button on several screens, until it completes.

It began with a meeting request that I had received. When I tried to open my first meeting request, the system asked me if I wanted to install Zoom. I clicked Yes, and then followed the instructions and it was installed.

I installed it myself when I received a meeting request.

I like it when Zoom adds new features. For example, one year ago, we were not able to send emojis. I could not imagine sending an emoji like a heart or a smile. Now, the feature is available and I use it. When new features are introduced, I consider it to be a job well done by the vendor. 

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.