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

Microsoft Teams vs ON24 Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 3, 2025

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

Microsoft Teams
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
181
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Social Software (2nd)
ON24 Platform
Ranking in Virtual Meetings
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Virtual Events Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Virtual Meetings category, the mindshare of Microsoft Teams is 3.8%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ON24 Platform is 1.8%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Virtual Meetings Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Teams3.8%
ON24 Platform1.8%
Other94.4%
Virtual Meetings
 

Featured Reviews

Ayush Saxena - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Collaboration has transformed daily work and supports seamless global voice communication
Microsoft Teams could be improved, especially regarding contact center solutions which have a growing need for omnichannel capabilities, integrating with external platforms such as social media and email for a unified experience. Minor improvements might include reintroducing features such as GPU options available in classic Microsoft Teams to address issues in modern Microsoft Teams related to video meetings and content sharing. Furthermore, essential information such as who started or ended recordings should be more accessible in the Microsoft Teams admin center. I rate it a nine because Microsoft Teams occasionally experiences glitches in the client, leading to missing chat history or other transient issues. The performance issues with the desktop client and the support service complexities contribute to my rating being less than perfect. I have not identified any other improvements needed for Microsoft Teams.
reviewer1337886 - PeerSpot reviewer
Multimedia Production Manager at a legal firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Easy setup and an a la carte pricing model
The solution needs a more modern interface. One of our biggest complaints is that we don't have the ability to dynamically push our interface to participants. Adobe Connect is an older technology, but it allows us to push our own layout and design to participants. One of the solution's strengths is that it's web-only but that is also a weakness. It is not a software solution but is browser-based which has its advantages and disadvantages. Zoom has become such a force that its ease of use surpasses ON24.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of Microsoft Teams are the calendar integration and the integration of chat and chat history into events."
"Using the solution's screen-sharing feature, we can go through a document together and take control."
"Microsoft Teams has impacted my organization positively because we have taken the Microsoft Office suite altogether for enterprise level, which gives us exposure to all these platforms."
"I am actively using Planner, which is very convenient because I can have all of my tasks from projects, from different boards, from my personal list; I have everything in one list and I can filter and divide and prioritize."
"The integration of online jobs and documents is one of the most valuable aspects of the solution. The ability to integrate tasks and to assign tasks to certain people is great."
"The installation is very, very easy."
"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 corporate world widely accepts the solution for virtual meetings. Also, it has good availability."
"In general, the solution provides a good experience, the user interface is friendly and from the user perspective, navigation was simple."
"Friendly user interface and simple navigation."
"The solution works well with third-party integrations."
 

Cons

"We encountered occasional outages, which occurred a couple of times last year while using the product."
"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."
"The product needs to improve its security."
"Only once did we really get help from Microsoft support; the rest were cases we resolved ourselves while just exchanging useless emails with support."
"The biggest issue is web content."
"I would say that Microsoft Team invitations from the calendar within the solution could be improved."
"The product is not fully integrated in Brazil."
"One time the product was basically freezing. I couldn't send a message to my colleague for some reason."
"Bandwidth optimization could be increased."
"The solution needs a more modern interface."
"One thing that could be improved is that there is a 5,000 person limit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is part of MS Office 365 and I would rate its pricing five out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are monthly."
"We have a license for the solution."
"It is moderately expensive than other Microsoft products."
"The solution is expensive and I would rate it a nine out of ten."
"It is expensive."
"It is affordable because it also includes the licenses on Microsoft Word, Microsoft Office and SharePoint."
"It is a bit more than moderately expensive."
"We get the solution on a corporate plan, where everything is included."
"We paid $1,800 for five webinars, which is the standard fee. If you require support there is a $300 additional fee, extra attendees is an additional fee, integration is an additional fee, etc. All these extras could add on another $2,500 which was not in our budget."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Virtual Meetings solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business66
Midsize Enterprise46
Large Enterprise77
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Teams?
From an organizational point of view, the pricing and setup costs for Microsoft Teams are right, especially since it integrates all the new technologies coming to market, including AI and various A...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Teams?
One issue is that now it requires the presenter to initiate the meeting. Previously, anyone could quickly become a presenter, but now I have to ask or request for the presentation. This can cause p...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Teams?
My primary use case for Microsoft Teams is day-to-day communication and collaboration with colleagues across different teams and locations. I use it for chats, virtual meetings, sharing documents a...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

MS Teams
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Honeywll, AIRFRANCE, AccuWeather, Lilly
IBM, Zendesk, Salesforce, Linkedin, Intel
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Teams vs. ON24 Platform and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.