Microsoft Teams Reviews

My main use cases for Microsoft Teams include daily aligning calls, attending regular calls, and meetings.

The features of Microsoft Teams I find most useful for team productivity are mainly the screen sharing feature, along with recordings and automatically generated transcripts when we do recording.

The biggest benefit of Microsoft Teams that I have found is the storage transcripts, which is a very good option.

I think the interface of Microsoft Teams should be improved, as I find the Zoom interface much better compared to Teams. The calendar synchronization and other features in Zoom are much better. I think a whiteboard would be a great inbuilt tool instead of having to integrate a third-party tool to showcase and write directly.

I have been working with Microsoft Teams for somewhere around six months.

It is easy to set up Microsoft Teams.

I would rate the stability of Microsoft Teams as a six or seven, as there is a lot of audio drop in between, so it's not that stable.

It is easy to scale Microsoft Teams.

I have evaluated other tools before working with Microsoft Teams, including Zoho and Google.

I decided to go for Microsoft Teams based on the features and storage being provided, and we have taken a decision to only use Teams, as we discontinued the others.

It takes about five to 10 minutes for the deployment of Microsoft Teams.

I have faced some challenges with Microsoft Teams, specifically that high bandwidth is required, as it utilizes a lot of bandwidth while working.

I have not found the security features in Microsoft Teams effective, as I have not used any security features much.

Microsoft Teams does not support any AI initiatives or projects with automated workflows that I am aware of.

I do not plan to increase the usage of Microsoft Teams for now, but whoever joins new will be using it.

I think the price of Microsoft Teams is reasonable, but I'm not the right person in that regard because other people in my company handle the purchasing.

I recommend that those who plan to use Microsoft Teams should know that it's a good tool and that it offers multiple other features of Microsoft as a package.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Microsoft Teams an 8.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure

I have used Microsoft Teams as a replacement for Skype for Business, originating from the old Lync and OCS days. I have been providing voice services in Teams, OCS, Lync, and Skype for Business since 2007.

Microsoft Teams adds value for businesses by providing functionality that includes co-authoring on work documents, publishing Power BI sites for reporting and billing, and integrating calendaring. It serves everything in one place and improves communication within organizations.

The biggest issue with Microsoft Teams is switching identities, especially when communicating with external organizations. Users often don't know they have messages from another company unless they log out and log back in with a different identity. This identity management needs improvement.

I have been working with Microsoft technologies for 25 years and using Microsoft Teams specifically since its inception.

I have logged tickets for Office 365 and received responses within 24 hours, depending on the severity. While it takes time to reach someone knowledgeable, the support provided is helpful.

Negative

Microsoft Teams replaced Skype for Business, which itself had replaced Lync and OCS before that.

Microsoft Teams comes with Office 365 licenses like E3, but there are options for those who prefer not to pay for Teams by using alternative products like Slack.

Slack

I rate Microsoft Teams a seven out of ten. Although it is a solid solution, there is room for improvement with features like better identity management for external communication. Based on my personal experience, I believe Microsoft Teams continues to evolve and add value to businesses.

We use it for all team meetings or any virtual meetings, 24/7. Teams is our default platform because we use Microsoft 365 products. 

And in most of the organizations I've worked at, Microsoft 365 is the default.

The integration capabilities in Teams work pretty well. Teams integrates with a lot of our technologies, especially features like the Teams channels. The integration works really well.

Teams is a really good product because there isn't much competition. The whiteboard and content sharing are good. Pretty much everyone has content sharing, but the whiteboard-sharing sessions are great.

Teams has introduced AI-based features like the note taker, which is good.

I've been seeing a lot of frequent updates, and sometimes the latest ones aren't very stable. So that's one issue I've found with Teams.

I've been using Teams for a very long time, probably since 2010.

I would rate Teams's stability as a nine out of ten. However, some recent updates have made it less stable. I find it a little bit choppy.

Sometimes, I find the network quality is not very good with low bandwidth. So, sometimes, when you have low bandwidth the quality becomes very poor. So, you have to optimize your usage.

There are around 30,000 end users in the company.

Scalability is good. 

We use both Zoom and Teams.

The initial setup is not very complex. Some of the things involve syncing IDs to the cloud if you have an on-premise Active Directory. 

Then, you might need to clean up your IDs and sync to Azure Active Directory. But once the IDs are in Azure Active Directory, the single sign-on feature is pretty seamless.

It's part of the Microsoft 365 subscription, so it's either monthly or whatever your organization agrees on. It's part of the EULA (End-User License Agreement).

It is expensive. The licensing fees depend on the features you want. You don't buy only the Teams license; you buy it as part of the Microsoft 365 bundle.

If you want extra Active Directory features, then you need to buy, for example, Azure Active Directory P1 or P2 licenses. Those are extra and give you more identity features to manage Microsoft 365. 

If you want to use other features, like malware protection or protection from email attacks, then you need to pay for those as well. It depends on your usage and your organization's needs.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

When it comes to Teams, you don't have much choice. Zoom is another option, but Teams has a lot more features. 

Zoom is just audio, video, and some other functions, but Teams can be integrated with a lot of other channels and notifications. In those terms, it's pretty good.

I find using Jira to create and share files within the channels very convenient. We can add simple things like spreadsheets or whiteboards to a channel, and all the sharing is done automatically. For example, when working on a project, I start a new channel, and everyone knows to go there to find all our documentation.

In a previous company, we set up tenants in every country and replaced expensive telephony solutions with phone numbers directly connected to those tenants, reducing costs.

It has helped me manage tasks in projects. In a channel, when tasks are open in a Jira board, you can assign them there, and they're constantly visible to all the tech people assigned to that project. It's easier for everyone to see where we are and what's outstanding.

Microsoft has recently introduced Copilot in Teams. It's great for transcribing meetings and providing summaries. By the time you finish a meeting, the full summary is complete, which means less note-taking. You can also input multiple documents and get Copilot to summarize them. While it still needs some fine-tuning and sense-checking, it certainly saves time.

When I embed products like Jira into my channel, I must keep re-authenticating, which can be a pain. 

One thing that needs improvement in the solution is licensing tools within the application, preferably on a per-user basis. Also, it would be great if the contacts list could be synced between it and Outlook. If I receive an email in Outlook, I can easily create a meeting with that person's credentials. But I must manually find and enter their email address in Microsoft Teams. It's a small thing, but it can be frustrating.

I have been using the product for eight years. 

My previous company had around 50,000 people using Teams, and my current company has about 35,000, so it's very scalable.

I haven't personally contacted Microsoft's tech support.

Microsoft Teams is a bit easier to use. I liked Google Hangouts, so moving away from it took a while. But now that I'm used to how Microsoft Teams works, it would be difficult to return to something like Hangouts. I don't even think Hangouts exists anymore.

I prefer the solution, and I find Webex cumbersome. Webex can have more people in a meeting, but realistically, we can now have hundreds of people in meetings on Microsoft Teams. There used to be a limit on it, and it didn't handle too many people well, but the tool seems to have fixed that issue.

There used to be limitations on the number of people in meetings, but I'm not sure what they are now. They've certainly increased the limit. I know it started having usability issues after about 50 users. But we sometimes have a couple hundred people in our meetings now with no real problems.

Microsoft Teams is a bit more resource-hungry than some other products, but that's to be expected these days.

I don't think the solution is as expensive as big Webex licenses. It doesn't usually offer one-on-one licenses, so it's hard to compare. It's more expensive than the Google equivalent, but you can't replace Microsoft Teams with Google's offering.

The Google equivalent would be something like Hangouts, but it's not a fully-fledged business solution like Microsoft Teams.

My advice for those considering using Microsoft Teams would depend on their specific business needs and the type of connectivity they require. But I'd say, try it - you won't look back. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

I use Microsoft Teams for all our internal meetings with colleagues. We also utilize it for customer meetings, sending out invitations for any meetings we arrange. Additionally, we have some groups set up for chatting with customers. For internal communication, we have several team groups separated by department - for example, Sales has its group, and Technical has another. All our internal communication happens through these channels.

The instant messaging and video meeting features in Microsoft Teams improve my productivity the most. Instant messaging allows for faster responses compared to email. With many colleagues working remotely, video meetings are often the only way to connect. I could even participate in my last meeting while driving to another city. Having meetings, with some people in a meeting room and others joining remotely, is also very useful.

The main advantage is that the Microsoft 365 calendars are synchronized, allowing us to use both calendars interchangeably. Additionally, I can create meetings using Microsoft Outlook, which is integrated with all Microsoft products.

I'd like to see better document-sharing capabilities. Sharing multiple documents during a meeting can take time, especially on Mac. On Windows, you can switch shared content on the fly, but on Mac, I often have to stop sharing and then choose another window to share.

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. It is quite stable, but we do occasionally experience some issues. The main problems we encounter are related to connection stability—sometimes, the video freezes or disconnects during meetings. However, it's difficult to determine if Microsoft Teams specifically causes these issues or if they're due to other factors like poor internet connectivity. While these problems occur, they're not frequent enough to impact our overall user experience with the platform.

I rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. It supports a large number of participants during meetings. My company has 250 users, and we have had meetings with 50-70 users simultaneously. 

I haven't contacted support yet. 

Before Microsoft Teams, we primarily used Skype for our communication needs. We switched from Skype to Microsoft Teams because Skype was more limited in its capabilities, especially for larger organizations. Skype was a separate product that didn't scale as well as the solution. While it had many features, it was more suited for personal use at the time. For example, I remember that video conferences were initially limited to just four participants on Skype.

I rate the tool's deployment ease a ten out of ten. I don't have direct experience deploying Microsoft Teams, as it doesn't require a separate deployment process from my perspective. I had to install it on my machine, which only took seconds. The broader setup of corporate accounts and users is related to Office 365 rather than specifically for the solution.

The solution is part of enterprise Microsoft 365 licensing. 

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. 

Microsoft Azure

At my previous company, we used it primarily for connecting and collaborating with different locations and teams. We joined meetings, had conversations, and took notes within the platform. 

Additionally, we used Teams for screen sharing and remote collaboration.

I like the background effects. We can select a wallpaper or a video background, especially if we're in a noisy or messy environment.

Compared to Zoom, which also requires a subscription-like Teams, Teams requires a stronger network for joining conversations and meetings.

Ssometimes, there's lagging. Sometimes, there are call log issues. I think maybe the call log shows "bad network connection" even when the network is fine. 

Sometimes, if you have bad network connectivity, it shows automatically, and the call goes on hold. But when you're continuously in a meeting for one or two hours, screen sharing, or providing remote troubleshooting, sometimes the Teams call goes on hold. That might be something that needs improvement.

So the lagging can be improved.

I've been working with Microsoft Teams for around two and a half years at my previous organization.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

Everyone in my company uses it. So, it is extensively used in my company. There might be 20,000 users pan-India. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

Compared to Zoom and Webex, Teams has a very strong network. We can easily connect via phone using Microsoft Intune. We can also join via laptop. And I like the new features like Copilot. That's what I like most.

Teams is very light, smooth, and reliable compared to Webex.

The installation is very, very easy. You can go to Google, search for Microsoft Teams, and easily install the desktop version. It's the easiest process, not complex at all.

It's a smooth application. It will take around a few seconds, but it depends on your hardware capability and your devices.

We use the paid version. On my mobile, I have Teams service as a work profile, so I can join with my phone. The subscription is there. 

I'm working for NTT. So this mobile phone license allows me to join.

It's a nice application. Microsoft Teams is great for remote calling and joining calls.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. I would recommend Teams to others users because it's very reliable and smooth compared to others like Zoom and Webex.

My team members are distributed in various locations. We use the solution for our day-to-day meetings and communication. 

I find several features of Microsoft Teams valuable. First, the group chat feature is great for team collaboration and sharing updates. Second, scheduling meetings is very easy, whether through Outlook or directly in the tool. Another useful feature is the notifications for meeting start times, which ensure you don't miss any meetings even if you're working on something else. Additionally, Microsoft Teams creates a chat where you can take and share notes during meetings, which I find helpful.

When we work on certain documents, we put them in the group chat and collaborate on them. It's really easy to collaborate that way. Another great feature is the ability to reply to specific messages in the chat, which is cool. Also, tagging people while chatting is very useful.

We use a tool called Darwinbox for project management and another tool called Advantage Club, a rewards platform where you can reward your colleagues with points they can redeem. These are the integrations that we have included in the solution. I think the Darwinbox integration is smooth and good. For example, if someone receives a reward, it immediately shows up on Microsoft Teams.

One thing that could be improved is the auto-correction feature. When we type, we often send messages with spelling errors. While there is an edit feature to correct these mistakes, I think spelling-checking capabilities could still be improved.

Another capability I'd like to see is an AI-based feature where we can query past chats for summaries. For example, asking for a meeting summary from the chat history would be great instead of manually going through all the messages.

I have been using the product for three years. 

We have experienced some glitches at times. I rate its stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten. We use Zoom for big crowds. However, the tool can accommodate 50 users. My company has more than 500 users who use it daily. We plan to add more users as the company grows. 

I haven't contacted the tool's support yet. 

I used Google Meet before Microsoft Teams. I switched to Microsoft Teams when I changed jobs. 

I rate Microsoft Teams' deployment ease a nine out of ten. The deployment process is straightforward and doesn't take much time. 

Our IT team deployed the solution. 

The tool is cheaper than Google Meet. I rate it a three out of four. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. It's a great tool for your business if your team is distributed. 

Microsoft Azure

From that collaborative view, I'm a big user of Teams, mainly because of business. I use Teams a lot for meetings and collaboration, both internally and externally. I think it works pretty well.

I have integrated it with my Jira infrastructure, so I'm able to make phone calls directly from my Teams application to literally the entire globe.

have a third-party call center vendor that I've already integrated with Teams, so I can switch between different profiles. So at the moment, I'm okay. I haven't run into anything that I would need to change.

For Teams, it's purely because of collaboration. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a good tool for communication. All my meetings, most of my presentations... I like the whiteboard feature as well. I'm able to scribble some stuff if I need to explain a couple of items. 

Teams has been a pretty cool tool for me and my organization, and for making communication easier.

The chat functionality is pretty decent. I have history; I can always scroll back and see if I need to, and the search functionality makes it easy for me to navigate across Teams platform. 

If I have to share any document, I can easily find it there. Also, creating specific groups for specific people so that we can communicate easily about data and information is pretty decent as well.

I would like the initial setup process to be more user-friendly.

I have been using it for five years now. We have E3 suite.

I would rate the stability a five out of ten. We had some upstream outages which impacted collaboration. 

The only issue is that it's not local; it's not in-country. Whenever there are upstream issues, we get impacted.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It's awesome and can integrate with a couple of things as well, which is brilliant.

In my local region, we have about 500 end users in total. My organization is much smaller. I have a customer with almost a thousand users, and it works brilliantly. I attended an online meeting with the organization, and it went perfectly. 

The only disruption was due to local internet capacity, but from Teams functionality standpoint, it worked brilliantly. We were able to have a town hall across eight countries, which worked brilliantly.

We had Skype before. I think it was more business-driven.

The business decided to migrate. We had on-premises Exchange and cloud, and we adopted the features in Microsoft 365.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy. Microsoft can make it even more user-friendly in the future.

Maintenance requires zero effort. The only reason I would look at Qualys and, eventually, Orca is for deep security. I wanted to look at it from either Orca integration or a Microsoft Sentinel integration to get a view of the tenant and its security posture.

I didn't deploy it. I had a third party do it on my behalf.

I would rate the pricing as a ten out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is very expensive. They need to work on their pricing. I hear they want to decouple Teams from some of the packages, but I don't know how true that is.

But I would like the prices to be lower.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten; it's awesome. It's a good platform.

I would recommend it to others. Go for it, if it meets your specific use case. Look at the size of the organization, look at the value of what you are working on. If you want standardized resources globally, then I think this is the way to go, and Microsoft is the way to go.

Public Cloud

Microsoft Azure