Microsoft Teams Reviews

Our primary use case for Microsoft Teams is chat and meetings. We also utilize Teams to access files through SharePoint and OneDrive, form Teams groups, and conduct meetings. Our environment includes an on-premises deployment and approximately 250 users, with most using it daily and a small number using it weekly.

The platform has facilitated our communication and collaboration, especially in a remote or hybrid work environment. It has streamlined our access to shared files and improved our ability to conduct meetings and collaborate on projects.

We particularly value the platform's integration with SharePoint and OneDrive for file access, chat, and meeting functionalities. These features enhance our ability to collaborate efficiently and maintain seamless team communication.

They could enhance the product's stability and integration features.

We have been using Microsoft Teams for more than one year.

I rate the platform's stability as a seven out of ten. We have encountered issues such as repairing Outlook profiles and reinstalling Office for some users.

Microsoft Teams' scalability is seven out of ten.

We previously used Skype for meetings and video calls. We switched to Microsoft Teams for enhanced collaboration capabilities and better integration with other Microsoft products.

The initial setup process was easy and took a few days to complete.

We took the help of our internal team for the implementation.

The product is expensive.

Before implementing Microsoft Teams, organizations should ensure they have a clear understanding of their use case and the integration capabilities required. Proper planning and deployment can significantly enhance the overall experience.

I rate it an eight out of ten. 

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. 

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.

Microsoft Teams is a tool I think everybody is using today. It is used for the team's day-to-day operations.

The product's performance has certain shortcomings that require improvement. We work remotely, and each team member occasionally has problems with not having sufficient network speed, even if we have sufficient network speed. The tool is pretty sensitive, and it wants to have a very fast network connection. When network speed is still okay but not sufficient for Microsoft Teams, then you start losing out on video quality, and then the video keeps hanging. You have to switch off the video and continue only with audio. In Microsoft Teams, even audio lags at times. For example, in a typical situation, when you try to have a conversation from the train, you won't have the best internet connection, but you can still watch some movies on YouTube, which means it should be sufficient, but for Microsoft Teams, it is not good. If it would be possible to somehow optimize network traffic, then it would be good.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for around five years.

I have not seen many technical issues with the product.

The solution's scalability works well.

I have not used any technical support for the solution.

Currently, in my company, we work with OpenShift.The plan is to move to some cloud infrastructure, and that is why I wanted to compare it with AWS, Azure, and Oracle's cloud services.

We used Skype's business edition for all messages, and then we switched to Microsoft Teams for all kinds of messages, conversations, and video conferences. It is used for all ranges of communication.

Microsoft Teams is more handy than Skype's business edition. We are all used to it, so it is a better option for us.

For development, it does not have much influence. Microsoft Teams, I would say, is for communication purposes, not for development. Yeah. Microsoft used to joke that Teams is for development.

Microsoft Teams offers a standard integration with Outlook, so there is nothing special.

Considering that Skype also offers integration capabilities to users, such functionalities are not new to Microsoft Teams. The integrations associated with Microsoft Teams work well, and they are helpful in areas like meetings and other scheduling work.

I don't use AI in Microsoft Teams. I don't need AI to talk to colleagues.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use the software for corporate-level communication such as messaging and texting. 

I like the product's screen share feature since we can explain things to the users at the other end using it. The solution helps me to establish a virtual connection with my team. 

The product should improve its security aspect, scalability, stability, and screen recording. It would be nice if Teams could come up with a feature where I can write chats and send them as mail. It would be also good if Teams could be connected to our application software so that for any doubts that can occur during the training, the operator can resolve them through chats. Hence, they can easily guide and close the issue. 

I have been using the product since 2021. 

I would rate the tool's stability a seven out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten. My company has 250 users for the solution. We use the solution 24/7 for daily meetings. 

The solution's technical support is very good. 

Positive

I would rate the solution's setup a nine out of ten since it is easy to sign up. The product's deployment took a month to complete. For the solution's installation, you need to validate. We used a team of 15 members to deploy the product. The solution does not require any maintenance. 

We did the product's deployment in-house. 

The product is worth its money. 

The tool's price is high and I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company for virtual meetings and collaborations.

The benefits derived from the use of the product revolve around the fact that it offers better collaboration functionalities and communication features.

I haven't seen any issues. The whiteboarding area in the tool has certain shortcomings where improvements are required. Whiteboarding needs to be improved in Microsoft Teams compared to other tools like Zoom, which is way better.

I have issues with the costs associated with the tool, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for more than five years. I am an end user of the solution.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Around 50 people in my company use the product.

The product is used on a daily basis in my company since we need to use the tool's chat functionality.

My company does not get direct support from Microsoft since we are the end users of the solution, but we do get support from the partners.

Zoom is better than Microsoft Teams. Zoom is kind of more flexible and complex than Microsoft Teams. I can say Zoom has more control. We are able to control the virtual meetings in a simpler manner than Microsoft Teams, even when conducting webinars. Many areas are simpler in Zoom compared to Microsoft Teams.

My company has stopped using Zoom since we have more Microsoft Teams licenses.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy. You just need to install the application and log in with your credentials, which is very easy.

The solution is deployed on the cloud version.

The solution can be deployed in a few minutes.

The solution can be deployed with the help of the company's in-house members.

The price of the product is okay. The challenge with Microsoft's licensing model is that the prices are on the higher side, especially for companies that have more users where spending a lot on licenses may be required. The cost is high in general.

The tool improves team collaboration with the help of a planner and chat option.

The tool's integration capabilities are seamless. For example, the tool can be integrated with the application.

The product helps support a hybrid work environment in our company, especially for remote teams.

My company has not ventured into the AI side associated with Microsoft Teams.

I recommend the product to others who plan to use it.

The product is simple to use, and it has a very low learning curve while offering overall stability.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

We use the product for chats and VoIP. We also have an Auto attendant feature. We have different departments, teams, and channels, so a lot of files are shared. We just started integrating different applications like Okta. We are using Okta as a plugin and are starting to do automated workflows within it. If we send a message and ask for access to Adobe Acrobat, it'll run a workflow and notify the person in Teams and email.

The product has improved communication in our organization. When I joined the organization, we were using Skype for Business, and there weren't a lot of group chats. Group chats are huge in Teams. I don't remember ever doing that on Skype for Business or any other platform. The product has really improved collaboration with other departments, like our developers and the operations team.

The meeting features are great. It is really easy. The group chats and chat history are valuable features.

The video quality has to be improved. The integration with SharePoint can be cumbersome at times.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The scalability depends on use cases. If we are just using chats, it is very scalable. If we use it like SharePoint or any file-sharing solution to take over old technologies, we get limited, and storage becomes pricey. We have had calls with more than 100 people. It does pretty well. 

If there is an issue, if someone is dropping calls or unable to hear anything, we can see their recent calls and track their network connectivity through the admin center. It usually ends up being the user’s internet issues, not a Microsoft issue. Around 550 users are using Microsoft Teams in our organization.

We have connected with the support team. The team has been helpful. The product has a roadmap of new features and stuff that will be implemented, which we can upvote. I've seen a feature request being turned into an actual feature. They’re very responsive.

Neutral

We were using Skype for Business. Then, we migrated to Microsoft Teams because Skype for Business was retired. It was no longer a viable option.

The initial setup is pretty easy. From the Microsoft 365 admin center, we can ensure it’s on for the organization, ensure it's deployed to users, and check guest access and network connectivity for things to run smoothly. We can see it all in a little dashboard. Now they have a new team, so things are a little different.

The deployment took probably three months. We did it by ourselves. A coworker and I deployed the product in our organization.

I have seen an ROI on the product. Collaboration is through the roof. We use it every single day. Everybody in the company uses it.

The pricing works in bundles. It costs around $12 for SharePoint and Teams per user. The license for E5 would be more than $300 because it includes a lot of things. The pricing is high. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten. Once you cross the given threshold, you must pay for storage. It gets a little pricier.

There are multiple places to do the same thing within the Microsoft realm. People working with teams must stick with it. It gets easier, and the features start getting better. It also has third-party plugins, workflows, and notes. There are a lot of interesting things in the product. When I was working for a hedge fund, we used to have a little application on which the traders would chat with each other. Microsoft does everything to about 70%. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use Microsoft Teams mainly to communicate with other office users, send messages, and collaborate on files. We’re trying to create a group in Teams to use as a central database for posting files. I also use the calendar to coordinate schedules so everyone knows what’s happening. Teams are also used for video and audio calls and setting up meetings with both internal and external users.

I find the chat and messaging system in Microsoft Teams the most valuable for productivity. We replaced Zoom and other video conferencing tools with Teams for internal and external video calls. Teams is now our standard tool for communication, handling both audio and video conference calls.

Everything is running smoothly, and I’m still exploring more features. As for improvements, I think it could be more user-friendly and integrate better with third-party software, like Zoom and other video conferencing tools.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for the past three to four years.

Regarding stability, Teams is very stable. It works well both on my mobile phone and desktop application. I’d rate its stability as a nine out of ten.

Microsoft Teams is easy to scale. For many users, it’s scalable, and I’d rate it a nine out of ten for scalability. We have around a hundred to a hundred fifty users in our company.

Compared to Zoom, Microsoft Teams is advantageous because it integrates seamlessly withMicrosoft Office and Microsoft 365, which we already use. It works well with our Microsoft 365 user accounts and email, making it a standard Microsoft product in our software setup.

The old Teams version will expire soon, so we’re downloading the new version to install it properly. Sometimes, it gives an error that we must download an app from the Microsoft Store to continue the installation. Once we update the app, we can continue installing the new Microsoft Teams. For deployment, it takes around five minutes to start using the solution.

For the setup experience, I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I’m unsure about the exact cost, but I believe it’s reasonable. Using Teams for collaboration, video conferencing, and messaging helps save costs, especially for communicating with third-party companies worldwide.

Microsoft Teams might integrate AI features in the future. I recommend using Microsoft Teams because it’s a popular collaboration tool among companies, especially those using Microsoft products. It is a standard tool for collaboration and communication within and outside the company.

For my overall rating of Microsoft Teams, I’d give it a nine out of ten.