Microsoft Teams Reviews

I am a freelancer. The decision on what solution to use is determined by my customers. Some of my customers have over 5,000 employees who are using Teams.

Teams is a virtual meeting solution. We use Teams to work with our clients purely with video conferences.

This is a stable solution, I have not faced any problems using the video conferencing.

As an app installed, Microsoft Teams is resource-consuming. When using it from their browser-based application, I experienced login problems.

For future releases, I would like to see Microsoft Teams make a lighter application and drop some features.

Microsoft Teams has all the features it needs, however, I noticed on some laptops that the features are not available. For example, if you want to change your virtual background, not all laptops have the hardware configured to link with that feature. The solution should make all features available irrespective of hardware configuration.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for two years.

This is a stable solution, I have not faced any problems using the video conferencing.

Microsoft is always scalable, it depends on the level of licensing an organization has purchased.

The initial setup of Microsoft Teams is easy. I would rate setup a 5 out of 5 as the solution is straightforward.

I have had concerns with login and resource consumption using Microsoft Teams, I would consider Zoom or Cisco WebEx as better solutions.

Organizations should consider what features they want to utilize. If they want all features to be available, they need to have an enterprise category system. Logging in from a home segment device will not have all features available. 

I would rate the solution an 8 out of 10.

We use this solution for communication internally and with our outside customers.

It is on cloud, and we are installing the desktop version on our workstations. There are also cases that we are using the cloud, the web edition, because you can login to your account from any workstation.

It is deployed across our whole organization, so we are multinational. Currently, I'm in the Philippines, but we also have our team members in Taiwan, Singapore, and Malaysia. Everyone is using Teams, and we're communicating using Teams.

I think it has helped me organize my day-to-day activities. It has also helped me to align with the schedule of my colleagues and other partners because there's a feature where we can see the schedule of other Team members.

It is easy to send some calendar invites to have a research session with our customer.

There's a feature that can send a notification to the Team's channel, but I think there's no way to have it escalated.

I have been using this solution since December 2020.

It's stable, but there have been times when I needed to login again, probably because of my internet connection.

It's scalable.

We have also used Viber, but it's not the best communication solution. We have also used ServiceNow for ticketing and Zoom.

Setup was straightforward. You just need to sign in, and you can use it right away. Internally, we advised everyone to install Teams on their workstation after they received their service machines.

Everything took just a couple of minutes. You need to download a couple of megabytes and install it. Everything will be done in less than 30 minutes, including the sign in.

It was done in-house. We did not have an indicated person for that. Everyone knows that they're using Teams and they install it by themselves. Most of the time, there is no help needed to install Teams.

From Teams alone, I think we are looking at it as the complete package, including the subscription of Microsoft Word and SharePoint. So overall, I think it is a good investment.

It is affordable because it also includes the licenses on Microsoft Word, Microsoft Office and SharePoint. The subscription is already covered with the $10 per month subscription.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10. 

The implementation is straightforward. You just need to validate Teams, and the product certificate is good for the company using it versus the other service operating from other providers. The solution is good.

We primarily use the solution for team conversations.

For example, I use it for filing team documents, although, for individual notes and things of that nature, I might use OneNote. I'm using it more and more now for video conferencing within the organization. I haven't really used it too much outside of the organization, although my plan is to use it outside of the company in the near future.

Began using for team documents and plans.  

Teams provides a strong capability to consolidate all collaborative capabilities related to a team in one platform.  This is especially important for project teams where the team members are spread across geographic locations and time zones. 
Incorporates improve and new collaborative tools such as Lists, Plans, Tasks into the tool that integrate into Outlook for notification and response to the assignements.  These capabilities are truly game changing in project management and delivery in the COVID-19 world

In the past three months of continuous improvements the tools have improved and simplified collaborative efforts dramatically

This solution is great for ad hoc video conferencing. It's so easy to start a meeting. We're finding more and more uses for the Teams video conferencing features. I'll be honest, it's a bit of a challenge for people to use the video aspect. The tendency for people is to not turn on their camera because they don't like the way they look or they're not able to sit in their pajamas during meetings if there's video involved. However, it's been a game-changer since the pandemic as it allows us to keep in touch with our teams remotely.

Microsoft has delivered integrated tools and collaborative capabilities that continue to strengthen and bring great value to Teams.  This positions Teams as the collaborative tool that will soon become the standard in the market for capabilities.  The document and plans/assignment improvements are game changes from a simplicity and functionality perspective.

I really like the video conferencing, and the reason is because of the simplicity of scheduling and using the software. Since I'm using Outlook for my email and calendar management, and it's connected with everything. It's just a click of a button to schedule a meeting, and then, to activate or to start the meeting, it's just another click of a button. Everything is streamlined and simple. 

The seamless integration and easy coordination with mobile devices is a wonderful aspect of the solution. It's great that, even if I'm not at my desk, I can still attend the Teams video conference and interact in the same way that I would if I were at my desktop.

There's an option to blur the background or to completely change your background. That's very helpful as we now use the solution to replace stand-up meetings. It removes background distractions for other users and allows participants to have a bit of privacy.

I have a regular meeting with a couple of people on my team, and normally, we would meet at somebody's desk or in an office or in the conference room. With Teams, we can all attend, and all see each other and we can have the same outcome as we would if we were all in the same room. While digital meetings as opposed to in-person meetings takes a bit of time to get used to, the learning curve is short because of the seamless integration.

What would really help is extending the time that you're active on the mobile device because I can't find a way in Teams to restart the app automatically. For instance, in Teams, we use it as an organization for instant messaging and for text messaging. The problem is if I restart my mobile device, I have to remember to restart Teams in order to get the text messages on my device. It's not automatic.

The solution should standardize the options across platforms. What I mean by that is, sometimes, on the mobile, there are not the same options and set up features and functions as are available on the web or on the desktop app. Everything should have the exact same functionality, otherwise, it's difficult if some people are on mobile and others are on desktop.

I've been using the solution for year now.

I haven't run into a problem with stability and I have not experienced any crashes, bugs, or glitches in the Teams App. You must remember this is a web app though.  Any performance or stability issues that I have experienced were related to Internet service issues and not the Teams App.

I haven't run into a problem with the scalability of the solution. I've used it at my last job with teams that are as small as 15 people and the thing that's nice about it is that I can be part of a dozen teams and it easily maintains the communication to all the teams separately so conversations stay organized.

We're business consultants, and, right now, there are about a dozen of us using it. The consultants are located in different geographic areas of the US, and there are even people working in India that are using Teams. Geographically, the solution expands to make communication possible anywhere.

The organization I work with now, as I understand it, has plans for increasing usage. Right now, it's rather limited in terms of who is using it. Maybe 20% of the people on staff are and there's about a hundred people on staff in total. 20% of those people using Teams in a relatively limited way. Frankly, I'm trying to encourage people to use Teams and drop other video conferencing tools.

I don't know how technical support is, to tell the truth. The type of technical troubleshooting I use for Teams is basically just seeking answers on the internet. I typically Google something if I don't understand an aspect of the solution.  There are community boards and that sort of thing. It's worked out pretty well for me. I've never had a crash or a bug though, so I've never had to reach out to technical support to get them to get me back online or to sort out an issue of that nature.

We haven't used a different solution previously. This is the first video conferencing suite we've adopted in the company.

The initial setup is web-based in terms of the style of set up and is very straight forward. I use the web-based setup because I wanted my experience to be the same no matter what device I use. As an example, I can use my work laptop, or my Chromebook or tablet and I have the capabilities to see and interact in the same way.

There's an initial challenge though because if people that have the app have it installed on their laptop, for instance, and they're running an application on their device, it has a different look and feel compared to what's on the web version.

We have one person to deploy and maintain the solution. It's actually a part-time role. It's one of the consultants who maintain it as part of his other duties. He's in charge of desktop devices and desktop applications. 

When a new person needs to be added, he just sets up the laptop and gets everything ready. He also maintains the license. With Microsoft 365, it's pretty straightforward. I just access the Office app or service and it installs directly. I may access the app through the cloud anyhow, so there's really no maintenance to do.

We have an employee in house that maintains the licensing, however, we install the solution ourselves for the most part.

I don't handle the payments for the service. It's not my department.

We're using the latest version of the solution. We just get the solution from the cloud, so it's always the most up-to-date option.

I've noticed, since the pandemic, that, as of maybe three or four months ago, Teams was much more widely accepted in Europe than in North America. I believe this is starting to change.  Recently though (late 2020) this has changed and especially since the roll-out over the summer and fall of improvements in collaborative document, planning and tracking capabilities.

I would recommend marketing the tool to people by showing demos of the capabilities for people and actual use cases. If I were trying to bring this into a new company I would ask people what they were doing for communicating with teams, or how they were using text messages, collaboration tools, video conferencing currently, etc., so that I could actually demonstrate how to do that same thing. 

There's literally hundreds of text tools, collaboration apps and video conferencing options on the market. The key to a business' success at communication is to ensure the various teams are all on the same platform or using the same tool.

That doesn't mean everyone in the company needs to use it the same way. If they're using the same tools, then at least, the base platform is the same and your company can build on that. Rather than Google docs for one thing and Microsoft Teams and, OneDrive, SharePoint, and all of these different tools, you've got to kind of pick a lane.

I would rate the solution overall at about an eight out of ten. That's due to the simplicity and ease of use. There are great features available. However, it loses a few points because the setup and the admin capabilities are different across platforms.

Microsoft Teams is used, in our case, to collaborate with all internal employees, to work on offering some proposals, and to work together online on files in Word and Excel. We largely use it to collaborate online and to have video meetings with customers. 

We can integrate SharePoint sites with other people. We have libraries that are available within Teams so that people can sync those libraries to their local drives and therefore will have the most up to date information and documents at their disposal.

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. 

I'm really waiting for the release of Lists to be included. Lists is a new feature that will probably come into Teams in August. It will be a way of using some sort of database to enter interlinked lists.

I don't like the online version of Word and Excel. It skews the layout. It is no longer representative of the layout that you actually have in a document. You always have to open it in the desktop application to get an accurate representation of how the document will look. 

If you open a document in Teams, it opens online first. If you have, for instance, an entire image on the front page, that image is descaled to the right and to the bottom. So you have a lot of white space on the page, while in reality, it's pretty nicely aligned. You basically have a borderless page. That's one of the main things that they can improve on. If they had a workaround where you can open it in the desktop apps first, it would be better. 

The solution needs to adjust the number of protected channels within a team.

The solution should maybe include breakout rooms within a team meeting. For example, let's say you are with 10 people, within one meeting space. You can have three accounts in separate smaller "meeting rooms" with just two or three people accessing them and still be within the same larger meeting environment. Let's say if you have a team where you have some technical members, some solution architects, a bid manager, a capture manager, an account manager, etc., you should be able to break up a meeting into multiple smaller sessions on certain topics, and yet still stay within the same meeting space. 

They should include a visual application also within Teams, so drawings that are made can attach to that space within the proposal with the ability to add Word or Excel files, as well as tasks, etc.

We've been using the solution for two years now. That's well before everyone started using conferencing systems during COVID-19.

It's a stable solution. We haven't had any hiccups. Its been working flawlessly for the two years that I'm using it now.

The solution is easy to scale, however, you need to take into account best practices so that you don't lose oversight on the number of teams that you have. 

There are other things that can be improved of in terms of scaling. For the moment, you can have approximately 5,000+ different teams within your Office 365 license. In each team, you can have multiple channels. The number of channels with limited access rights is limited to 256 or 250. If you create a channel where you want to find all your different projects and you have more than 250 customers within one team, you run into issues. Then you have to create separate teams for each customer. In those teams, you have various possibilities on channels. We started using a team, for instance, for customer projects. However, in customer projects, you are limited. It's only on about 25 channels that you can give access rights to certain people. If you are working on the project with company X together for a customer, you don't want them to see another project for another customer with a competing solution. That's the tricky part.

That was a limitation that we encountered with scaling. We changed the approach from having a team customer project to creating teams for each customer where we have projects.

Currently, in our organization, we have 250 employees using Teams. We use it quite extensively every day.

We haven't really reached out to technical support. If we need support, we first reach out to our IT department and they will figure it out on our behalf, or contact Microsoft directly. In my experience, until now, with Office 365, I haven't had any issues. I'm satisfied with the product but I can't speak to any specific experience related to customer service.

We use a bunch of solutions at any given time. We have Cisco Webex, for example. We also have the Mitel My Call app and for some of our customers, we also need to use Zoom and BlueJeans. So we have quite a few solutions that are active.

If you look at just the feature of video conferencing and you look at Zoom and BlueJeans and Microsoft Teams, they're all pretty much alike. It's mainly the integration of everything document-wise and the consistency that I really liked within Microsoft Teams.

Out of all of the other solutions, BlueJeans is the one that I found the least reliable. We had quite a few hiccups where we eventually fell back to Cisco WebEx for video conferencing instead of the BlueJeans solution.

Then we have Zoom, which I have less experience with. It's used by a few vendors with whom we collaborate from time to time. They use Zoom predominantly, so when we conference with them, it's largely through that.

In terms of Cisco WebEx, the thing that I don't like is that if someone invites you for a meeting and you connect to the meeting early, you don't get notified when the meeting actually starts, so you constantly have to reload until the meeting organizer starts the meeting and accepts you. For instance, last week, I went into a Cisco WebEx meeting. I connected two minutes before the actual time that the meeting should have started. I opened the WebEx application and the meeting didn't start. 10 minutes later, I reloaded the application and reconnected to the session and they were already actively meeting. The application didn't notify me when the meeting actually started. That's a big drawback.

The solution is installed by our IT department. In the beginning, we had some issues with assigning rights. Not everybody was able to create a team or to invite people into a team or to share files. However, now they have changed a few things around. There are quite a few people now that can create teams, add members, etc., and you can add external members and there are a few new policies internally about best practices.

I was one of the first parties to implement a solution like Teams. Our company bought a few companies and every company was using different tools as their main resource. The one thing that they all had in common was Microsoft Office 365, and yet they didn't use Teams at that time. I was one of the people asking our organization to implement Teams because my position requires me to have to collaborate with people from all of the different companies that our company bought.

The deployment was done in less than a week. That was due largely due to the availability of our IT staff. Once they began doing the implementation, however, it was done within a few hours. It was activated, rights were assigned, and people with rights could begin working and downloading the team's application on smart devices, on their computers almost right away. 

It's as easy as using Skype for a private person. You just download the application and you can start.

I believe we've been using the latest versions of the solution. We use whichever version is pushed out with Office 365.

I would recommend the product. It works with everything. I have an iPad Pro, I have an iPhone, I have my computer. It's installed on all three devices. It works flawlessly. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten, simply because there are a few things the solution still needs to improve upon.

We use it for team meetings. We're still in the process of evaluating the solution, however. 

The solution provides very clear conferencing, even on mobile devices. The voice clarity is excellent.

Organizing a meeting is very simple to do.

The solution provides for comfortable use. New users are able to navigate it pretty easily.

The interface of the solution could use improvement. Right now, the gold standard in terms of team conferencing user interfaces seems to be Zoom. Microsoft Teams should see if they could make their interface and usability as simple as that.

It's not as easy to augment your meetings as it is with competitors. For example, in Zoom, if I want to add attendees, I just grab the meeting link and post it to them. With Teams, how to do this is not as clear.

I'm pretty new to Teams. I've only been using it for the past two months or so.

The stability of the solution is good. The product is reliable in that sense. I haven't experienced crashes. There aren't bugs or glitches that disrupt the user experience. 

It's quite easy to scale the solution if you need to. It's possible to add new people into meetings, for example. We haven't had any issues in that sense.

Our IT department is engaging with Microsoft locally. I haven't made contact with technical support personally. As we were offered one free month of service, we're doing some experiments ont he platform.

We are now on Chatter. The entire team is using and Chatter. We have 5,000 Chatter licenses. The entire organization is using it. We are also evaluating Microsoft 365 which includes Teams.

Internally we are using Chatter across the company as of now. We will continue to use Chatter as it is part of our CRM and all the customer and customer service related communication will be through Chatter only. We are planning to use Microsoft Teams as a collaborative platform in the future.

Currently, now the entire communication of the company is between Teams and the corporate office is appraising each solution.

I've used Zoom in the past, as well as WebEx. With Teams, the clarity of the meeting is good, including when you are using it on a wireless device. Zoom, however, has the easiest interface. It's the most popular option currently on the market. Everyone is using Zoom. 

WebEx I wouldn't recommend. It takes a lot of bandwidth and is more difficult to use.

The initial setup was a bit complex. I couldn't really follow it very well.

Microsoft offers new users one free month of service, so it's easy to try it out if you want to.

Currently, we're just a customer of Microsoft. We aren't consultants or resellers.

To be honest, everyone is using Zoom these days. The familiarity with that system is higher, and the recommendation for that system is higher. 

When I set up Microsoft Teams, people were not very accustomed to how to use it. However, users have found that using it on the laptop is pretty good. Overall the system looks good. That said, when you try to use it on mobile, we've found the bandwidth is higher.

Currently, as a new user, I would rate the solution seven out of ten. If the interface was just a bit better, and it was easier to organize a meeting, I would rate it higher. Generally, it just needs to be tweaked to make it more user friendly.

Although we're not fully subscribed to the solution, I would recommend it to others.

Primarily we are using Microsoft Teams to facilitate collaboration during events and meetings. All of our meetings are voice and video. We are also using it for document sharing.

We use a file folder structure for maintaining all of our documents. There are version controls for projects that are completed and help to maintain the documentation.

Microsoft Teams has helped us improve collaboration through the use of chats, as well as conferencing, voice calls, knowledge management, and maintaining a repository. At this time, we spend four or five hours a day communicating using Teams.

The main features that we use extensively are voice and video calling. They have improved these features and the improvements are happening continuously. 

The other feature that we like is the repository, which is used for knowledge management. It integrates with SharePoint, where we can store and retrieve documents, maintain version control, and collaborate with each other.

I like these aspects of it, but this is a feature-rich product and I am probably not even aware of all the features that it has.

Microsoft Teams is quite demanding on bandwidth, which has been a problem during the COVID situation because we don't get enterprise-class bandwidth at home. Currently, we use broadband, and even the little variations that happen can throw you out of a meeting. It seems that you get disconnected really fast.

It takes a long time to load, which is something that could be improved.

Having a dial-in feature would be helpful because it would allow more people to be included in meetings.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for almost two years.

This is an extremely stable product and we use it on a daily basis. Since we have been on the cloud, I haven't seen any failures that have been the fault of the service. As long as our internet is up, it is working.

I don't see scalability as an issue. Initially, we had fewer licenses than we do now. As we expanded, we acquired more licenses and added more team members to the platform.

From what I recall, we started with about 500 licenses and we now have closer to 2,000. Two weeks ago, we had about 700 regular users. Adding users was seamless from our perspective, although you have to make sure that your network is configured properly, otherwise, there may be issues with performance.

I do not speak with Microsoft support directly. When I have a problem, I simply call my support staff.

I have used similar solutions and I wouldn't say that Teams has the best in terms of voice and video calling, although I have seen continuous improvement over time and I am happy with that. For example, we used to only see four people on a video call, and it has been increased to nine. These kinds of improvements are good.

On the other hand, when compared to other collaboration software, it is more bandwidth-intensive and takes longer to load. In general, it is heavier.

Prior to using Teams, we had been using Microsoft Exchange 2013. We migrated to Office 365 two years ago, which includes Teams as part of the package. While we were still using Exchange, we ordered Skype. From my perspective, Teams is much more stable than Skype. I found that if we used Skype in a very small network, for example with three routers, then it would work fine. Otherwise, we had issues with quality and stability.

The initial setup is easy, as most products from Microsoft are. It follows the same idea and is not difficult. We have the E3 subscription, so we are always using the latest version.

When we migrated from our Microsoft Exchange platform to Office 365, we had consultants come in to assist us with that. We also had some guidance from Microsoft.

The pricing for Teams is very competitive.

We did look at a couple of other products as well, including Zoom. Because of issues regarding security with Zoom, we only use it very rarely.

Network performance does impact teams, but Microsoft does give recommendations as to how the internet and network should be set up. If you follow these instructions then there will be fewer problems to fix. Essentially, if you are implementing this product then you need to very clearly understand the network requirements. Tweaking things on the network side is very important.

Overall, this is a very good collaboration product and the only thing stopping me from giving it a perfect grade is the heavy bandwidth usage.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for video conferencing and meetings.

There are a lot of applications being developed on Microsoft for Teams. They are building out a lot of Office 365 apps and the integration with everything is great.

The call quality has been very good, especially compared to Skype.

We like that you can get a lot of users on one call without the call actually failing or losing quality. Hosts can connect, if I recall correctly, up to 90,000 people. If you need a massive company-wide meeting, you can do it.

The UI can be further improved upon. When I used to use Skype, Skype was a small window that opened on your desktop. With Teams, when you use it, it occupies your full screen just like if you were in Word or Excel. Skype worked more like an app, which I preferred. I liked being able to use it in a minimized screen. If Teams could emulate that a bit, it would be a better user experience.

When we share the screen, we can't actually take control of the user's screen. When I'm trying to do some activity for another person or want to change something for them, it's not possible. In a technical way, I would like to take control of a system where I'm seeing the screen and I want to do some changes, while we are discussing things during meetings.

We've been using the solution for about six months now. It hasn't been that long.

There are occasional patches that are released and updates that need to happen. Occasionally services go down. However, for the most part, the solution is stable.

We haven't had any scalability issues so far. With the COVID-19 situation, our usage really shot up on Teams. We didn't run into any problems scaling up. So many people who were not using Teams are on the platform now. Previously, the solution was used by 30-40% of the company, and now it's closer to 70-80%. 

I've never been in touch with technical support.

We used to rely on Skype and have since moved over to Teams. It was pretty simple for us to decide on Teams because we were already using Microsoft products. 

A lot of the products that we use are Microsoft, including Skype. However, Microsoft is slowly stopping support for Skype and they're moving towards Teams due to the fact that a lot of applications are getting developed now on Teams.

It took our company about two months to put everything in place. We had to do some integration with a few of our colleagues.

I'm not really too sure on the pricing. That is not something that I handle. That is something that our payment team handles. 

We're just a customer. We're not partners with Microsoft.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. If the UI was better, where the system wouldn't take over the whole screen. I'd rate it higher. I'd also rate it higher if there was the capability not to just share screens, but to take over the screens of other people in a meeting, so discussions and changes could happen in real-time.

I'd definitely recommend Teams over both Skype and Zoom. In my opinion, it's far superior.

The primary use case of this solution is for communications.

In regards to COVID and the Pandemic, we would not be able to do our regular job without this mechanism in place.

We do our regular scrum meetings using Microsoft Teams. 

We have meetings with the entire company every week. There are hundreds of people connected and it works perfectly in terms of linking people together, showing some content, and showing some slides.

I am not familiar with all of the features yet, but some of the features I find to be most valuable are the visual conference call. We all see our videos as well as audios. 

The quality is much better than it is with Skype.

There is more clarity and everything is crisper.

We have not been using the collaboration part as much, as we are focusing on the communications rather than document sharing.

The communication part has been excellent so far.

While we are still familiarizing ourselves with the features, although I would say that there could be some improvements with some additional stability. For some who connect, and do not have a good connection from home or the internet is not as good, it needs a bit more stability. 

On rare occasions, it freezes and some people will lose sound or they could lose video. It needs better handling. 

It needs to be more robust in terms of stability. 

It's still a fairly new product, so they may still improve this a little.

I have been using Microsoft Teams for a few days. 

We are using the Teams business version, which is the one that is offered with the 365 premium package.

There are some issues with stability and it could be improved.

We are using Skype Enterprise but in two or three months, Skype is going to be decommissioned for us. The IT department has been using Microsoft Teams.

We have a local client installed. The software is installed on our desktop and updated to the most recent version whenever it's available.

The initial setup is simple, but if you are a government agency, you have to make it more secure and more robust. 

There are additional purchases necessary to secure it in a government agency where you don't want to share a document or expose documents that may be private.

If you have content that requires more security and you want to use it in a more secure manner, with more protection, then it will come at a higher cost. You have to set your environment up with additional features, such as multifactor authentication and identity protection, which are not available in the basic plan. Instead, they can be purchased additionally from Microsoft.

My advice for anybody interested in Microsoft Teams is that it's a good product and they should hire some consulting services that are specialists if they are serious about implementing it the correct way.

At this time, Microsoft Team fulfills everything we need.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.