No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Huddle vs Microsoft Teams comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Huddle
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Content Collaboration Platforms (22nd)
Microsoft Teams
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
178
Ranking in other categories
Virtual Meetings (4th), Enterprise Social Software (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Messaging and Collaboration solutions, they serve different purposes. Huddle is designed for Content Collaboration Platforms and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, up 0.1% compared to last year.
Microsoft Teams, on the other hand, focuses on Virtual Meetings, holds 3.1% mindshare, up 3.1% since last year.
Content Collaboration Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Huddle1.2%
Office 3658.6%
Google Workspace8.1%
Other82.1%
Content Collaboration Platforms
Virtual Meetings Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Teams3.1%
Zoom Workplace Business7.8%
Webex5.5%
Other83.6%
Virtual Meetings
 

Featured Reviews

it_user669327 - PeerSpot reviewer
Digital Marketing Manager at a non-tech company with 11-50 employees
With a dispersed team, we set permissions on files that are relevant to each team.
We use Huddle to store important team files. With a dispersed team, we set permissions on files that are relevant to each team. This helps us keep files up to date, as well as to streamline projects For file sharing, we were working on a pitch for a European-based client and our team was broken…
Anna Virtsan - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Project Manager at UkrSibbank
Have streamlined daily workflow and task management but still face inconvenience from recent interface changes and limited integration options
There are challenges and issues in Microsoft Teams, such as after recent updates where group chats were combined with Teams, chats, and groups into one. Users have to work with settings to make it normal again so Teams are separated from chats, and that was a really inconvenient update. Many users ask me to help make it back again to separate Teams and groups from one-to-one chats. That's probably the worst update they've made recently. Additionally, there are some minor features, such as when I work with messages, I don't have an actual forward or quote option when replying to someone's message. I need to be careful not to miss the quote sign. For a lot of people, they are confused about where the quotes option is. I've received a couple of hundred support tickets just regarding this issue. The function to share email to Teams chat doesn't work sometimes due to our compliance policies, and sometimes it would be nice to be able to forward an email to the group chat and have further discussions. Microsoft Teams could improve by being less glitchy because it glitches a lot, leading to undelivered emails and undelivered messages. It would be beneficial if the MS application Shifts, which adds functionality to groups, could be integrated into the groups calendar. Currently, many teams don't use the app because it is not integrated with the general calendar or the Outlook calendar, making it basically a useless application. The platform needs less Copilot and more people. The general Copilot integration into the platform is less glitchy, but Microsoft Teams is quite heavy and glitchy sometimes. Stability depends a lot on compliance restrictions, policies, and quality of internet. Sometimes, when updates are enrolling, the platform glitches, breaks, or shuts down.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We use Huddle to store important team files, and with a dispersed team, we set permissions on files that are relevant to each team, helping us keep files up to date and streamline projects."
"The most valuable features are that it is an all-in-one platform, making it very easy for collaboration with your core employees."
"Communication is really easy to handle."
"Screen sharing and chat retention are the most valuable features of Microsoft Teams."
"We use Microsoft Teams for group communications."
"Almost 70% of the world currently uses Microsoft Teams because it is easy to use."
"All of the solution's features are useful since we use it for saving data, chatting, meeting, and all such purposes."
"Sharing screens is valuable."
"The solution is easy to use and helps me to communicate with my students."
 

Cons

"I think the navigation from project to project could be improved, but other than that, nothing I would add."
"In terms of functionality, I would like to see support for multi-user or multiple windows for the File structure."
"There's a feature that can send a notification to Team's channel, but I think there's no way to have it escalated on something like that."
"The only issue is sometimes, when I share my screen, and there's text on it, the compression can make it very blurry. If Teams could solve this problem so that text remains clear during screen sharing, that would be nice."
"Microsoft Teams could improve the integration with Outlook because most of us are not using the last version of Outlook and it causes some issues."
"Microsoft Teams does not have any features that Zoom, Skype, or Webex don't already have."
"As an instant messenger, Teams is not as good as Lync."
"The solution’s initial setup is complex and could be improved."
"I think they can improve all those segments for channel bulking."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"If you have clients who do not have a computer and are joining with their phones it's an additional fee of $5.00 per user."
"I use Teams' free version."
"The solution is affordable."
"The tool comes as part of the Office 365 bundle and you don't have to pay anything extra."
"The pricing for Teams is very competitive."
"The standalone license is not cheap."
"The tool's price is high and I would rate it an eight out of ten."
"I would rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Content Collaboration Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business66
Midsize Enterprise45
Large Enterprise72
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Teams?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Microsoft Teams is good and fine.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Teams?
Microsoft Teams already comes with rich qualities, and the impact on the IT professional is very large with great features in terms of collaboration, team activity engagements, and friendly emojis ...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Teams?
My main use case for Microsoft Teams is team communications and collaborations, and sharing updates. For any task, we use Microsoft Teams. We share the specific builds for the distributions, and if...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
MS Teams
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AKQA, beats by dre, UK Cabinet Office, Centrica, ComCast, Commonwealth Secretariat, UK Department for Culture Media and Sport, US Department of Homeland Security, UK Education Funding Agency, Epson, Go-Ahead, Grant Thornton, KIA, KPMG, Megger, UK Ministry of Justice, NASA, US Department of Defense, P&G Prestige, Panasonic, Pearson, QinetiQ, Sony
Honeywll, AIRFRANCE, AccuWeather, Lilly
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Dropbox and others in Content Collaboration Platforms. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.