Webex Reviews

The possibility to have conferences with several people. The best feature is that you know to whom you are talking. It's not like a phone conference where someone is talking, but if you don't recognize the voice, you don't know who is talking.

Also, I like the ability to integrate video conference into the meeting.

I'm work at Telefonica International. This tool improves our communications with people all around the globe.

Cisco WebEx is always developing more functions and improving on the ones that it already has. So, I think that all areas are improving already.

For three years now.

Yes, but it depends on the customers'/users' networks, not with Cisco WebEx in particular.

No issues.

I would give it a six out of 10.

Not previously. But currently, we also use Lync (Skype for Business), and WebEx is far far better than Skype.

No, it's very easy to implement as long as you have a clear picture of what you want. Also, the tool is very malleable, so you can easily change functionalities.

Cisco is not cheap, and this product is not the exception to the rule, but it is worth all the money paid.

No.

If you have the budget, go for WebEx. You won't find anything more stable, scalable, and with a fair support team.

I enjoy conducting virtual training in the WebEx training room. I’m in Learning & Development and delivering training virtually with a tool that easily integrates with Outlook is great.

Ease of use; people in our company are familiar with WebEx meetings, so to move to the training platform didn’t take a lot of effort or knowledge share.

We are conducting various training sessions frequently using this platform.

For the Training centre:

1. When you use the whiteboard, you cannot MOVE the contributions of learners.
2. To co-facilitate and have all the features, e.g., mute or unmute learners, assign permissions, etc. It seems to be difficult.
3. Unmuting only certain learners, not the whole class, or muting all but not the facilitators seems to be troublesome.

Four years.

No.

Not yet.

I haven’t ask for tech support yet.

Used Saba. Scheduling and the integration with Outlook is much easier with WebEx.

Easy enough.

Not available.

With IT support and global company licenses, it is easy to use.

You can easily collaborate with your work colleagues even with your mobile phone.

We send news about our products through Cisco Spark and the people included in the room can ask questions about them.

The phone calling option.

1 year.

No

No

No

Very good

Very good

No

It was straightforward

We implemented an in-house one

We haven't calculate it

Be aware what is free and what needs an enterprise license.

No. We were sure to deploy Cisco Spark

No

Simple, yet powerful!

Excellent mobile interface (Android user here). Everything from
registration to team creation and collaboration feels smooth and
seamless!

Great collaboration tools included!

Instant messaging, video conferencing, document sharing... collaboration!

I'm new to the product.

I have not encountered any deployment issues.

I have not encountered any stability issues.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer service is excellent!

N/A

We did not previously use a different solution.

Initial setup was a breeze.

An in-house team implemented it.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.

WebEx Integration to Outlook helps our users to schedule audio conference meetings with a push of a button. It is easy to use. This product enables scheduling of the audio bridge with random conference codes.

I don’t have an example to share. This is basically a cost avoidance solution at this time. In the future it may change the way the organization functions which we support, as soon as they drive more adoption of video and web collaboration available with CWMS.

CWMS on-premises solution does not integrate either with CMR nor with Jabber as of yet. There is no video integration with other Cisco endpoints such as DX80, DX650, or the new Cisco IP Phones 8845 or 8865 video phones. These are the areas where it could improve.

I have used this solution for more than 18 months.

There is an issue with MR2 that was fixed with a special hot fix or MR3. If you host or join an audio bridge only by phone, the meeting never ends. However, after reaching two concurrent meetings, you are not able to start a new meeting.

The CWMS large deployment is limited to 2,000 concurrent participants. There is no way to increase this limit by using the same website. A new website name and additional resources are required in order to expand; this is not easy to support.

I would give the technical support a 8/10 rating.

They started using MeetingPlace and followed the path to upgrade to WebEx on-premises as Cisco acquired MeetingPlace.

The setup was quite straightforward.

It all depends on what your needs are. Employ this solution for only the US audio conference when you already have Cisco Workspace Licensing, then it makes sense. I don’t know what TCO would be if you need this for the international audio conference and if you don’t have the Cisco IP telephone or if you are using the Cisco user licensing.

We did not evaluate other options.

Take into consideration your user needs, what user experience you want to deliver, and of course how this solution will play with your existing unified or non-communications ecosystem.

• Virtual meeting rooms
• Video/Voice capabilities
• Desktop sharing and whiteboards

• Increased productivity
• Ability to have meetings on-the-fly, without any scheduling
• Resources are always available

I would like to see integration with legacy video endpoints.

I have used it for 18 months.

I did not encounter any stability issues.

I did not have any scalability issues. My requirement is a maximum of ten end points connected.

I would give technical support a rating of 9/10.

We previously used free solutions such as Skype or Google Hangouts.

The initial setup was simple.

We evaluated Videxio, Pexip, and Google Hangouts.

It is easy to implement. Go for WebEx cloud services.

I really value WebEx’s sharing of applications.

WebEx enables remote employees to participate in training sessions and other meetings.

Recordings are slow to start, sometimes fail, and are difficult to edit.

I have used it for over 10 years.

I did not ecnounter any stability issues.

I did not encounter any scalability issues.

User setup was straightforward.

WebEx’s sharing of an application or the desktop enables me to give a presentation or a demo to remote colleagues, customers and prospects. Other services such as email, audio conferencing and twitter are very useful for communicating in other important ways, WebEx is the corporate gold standard for what it does best, that is easy, reliable sharing of content on my screen to one or several hundred people in real time.

- Team collaboration

- Webinars

- Relieved some bandwidth

- Freed up budget

- Customer Service/Support

- UX

- 3 years

- No, pretty easy

- No

- No

- Poor

- Average

- Switched from WebEx to another provider

- Straightforward

- In-house

- Annual contracts can be rough

- This is the best everyone knows about, but there are plenty other players.