Aliyar Balikci - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Technology Senior Administrator at Genpa
Real User
Top 10
Great for virtual meetings, and dependable but the setup is complex
Pros and Cons
  • "It's a good product, we like using it."
  • "The initial setup could be simplified."

What is our primary use case?

We use Skype for Business for virtual meetings.

What is most valuable?

It's a good product, we like using it.

What needs improvement?

The initial setup could be simplified.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Skype for Business for approximately 10 years.

We are using the older version, but it is enough for us.

Buyer's Guide
Skype for Business
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Skype for Business. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
769,334 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have no problems with the stability of Skype for Business.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have 300 users on all levels using this solution.

How are customer service and support?

I have not contacted technical support.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was not easy. You must have experience.

What about the implementation team?

I completed the setup myself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We purchased an open license.

We own the license. You can buy a license once and use it for a long time. If you do not want to upgrade or you don't need to upgrade the license, you can keep it for a long time.

What other advice do I have?

This is not a solution I would recommend. We purchased the license approximately six years ago. If you are thinking about using this solution, I would recommend purchasing a new cloud-based license. They should use Teams. I would recommend Teams. Skype is outdated.

I would Skype for Business a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
AVP - Cyber Secuirty at Cloud4C Services
MSP
Easy to use, great for remote meetings, and has lots of collaboration potential
Pros and Cons
  • "Making calls and having meetings is easy."
  • "The solution isn't connected to Microsoft Teams, and I feel like there is better communication on that particular solution. The group capabilities are a bit less than Teams."

How has it helped my organization?

The solution has improved the flexibility of meetings for our organization. For example, I can use it from my phone or laptop. I can use it wherever I am. It's increased our communication channels.

It has everything in one place from sharing to team management. It makes everything easy.

What is most valuable?

There are many valuable aspects of the solution. For collaboration purposes, there are many integration capabilities. 

Making calls and having meetings is easy. 

There are a lot of very fundamental functions on offer.

What needs improvement?

There is sometimes a lag, often because this is not integrated with a few fields. We are in India, so we have some restrictions on some key integrations. For example, it cannot integrate with our internal landlines. When I was in the United States, this wasn't a problem at all.

We need some sort of functionality whereby users can use a link as browser calling. Calling only is what is available to us. That's not in every country, however, just a few. They should make it standard across the board around the world.

The solution isn't connected to Microsoft Teams, and I feel like there is better communication on that particular solution. The group capabilities are a bit less than Teams.

I have some standard meetings that happen on a regular basis, and it would be nice if I could just go directly to them from Skype instead of looking into my calendar and clicking on a link.

Group calling is not available on Skype right now.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for almost a full year at this point. The company has been using the solution for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is great. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. We don't face any challenges with the solution in that sense.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have limited employees, so we've never really experimented with scaling the solution. I can't speak to how easy it would be to expand the solution.

We have about 900 users on the solution right now.

We use the solution quite often. It's used on a daily basis.

How are customer service and technical support?

We get our technical support from Microsoft, who owns Skype. They've always been fantastic. We have been satisfied with the level or response we get.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation of the solution was handled before I came to the company, so I didn't participate in the initial institution. I don't know if the product has a straightforward or complex setup.

I believe that deployment took place under the supervision of another team.

What other advice do I have?

With work from home situations increasing, and a company would benefit from using this solution. The collaboration capabilities are great and allow for real-time interactions within teams. It's perfect for remote work.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Skype for Business
April 2024
Learn what your peers think about Skype for Business. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
769,334 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Manager, Quality and Process Excellence at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
A stable solution with good support for working from home
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature is stability."
  • "We have had trouble with scalability when trying to host large meetings."

What is our primary use case?

We use Skype for all of our video conference purposes.

How has it helped my organization?

Skype for Business and video conferencing makes it easier to work from home.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is stability.

What needs improvement?

The quality of calls has to be improved. I don't know whether it is a server problem that is taking away from the quality, but I have found that it is sometimes poor.

We have had trouble with scalability when trying to host large meetings.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Skype for Business for close to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Stability is good but there are issues with call quality.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would rate scalability average because I have found that there is an upper limit to the number of people that can be added to a conference. I'm not sure whether it is depending on the license that my organization has, but I do find that scalability is an issue in a large conference scenario.

It is used across our organization, with close to 15,000 or 16,000 users.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our in-house team is responsible for technical support, although if they cannot handle the problem then they contact Skype. When this has happened, our problems have been resolved very fast.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have been receiving meeting invitations from outside of our organization using other solutions, such as Webex. When I attend those meetings I use their software.

What about the implementation team?

Our in-house IT group pre-installed this solution for me. They also handle our support.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Balbino - PeerSpot reviewer
Analyst at Leripe Construtora
Real User
Reduces costs and increases comfort for employees that would normally travel to meetings
Pros and Cons
  • "Video conferencing to hold virtual meetings helps to prevent employee displacement, where everyone can now enjoy the comfort of their own offices."
  • "If one of the users has a poor internet connection, this failure will compromise the meeting, causing delays and distortions in the communications."

What is our primary use case?

The use of Skype Business has several purposes within our organization, each determined by the specific situation. Its use of instant messages and chats has helped a lot in short conversations, avoiding much of the need to use email for a certain action.

Audio calls help a lot in terms of reducing costs for long discussions, and takes advantage of the maximum gratuity between users of the same program.

Video conferencing to hold virtual meetings helps to prevent employee displacement, where everyone can now enjoy the comfort of their own offices.

How has it helped my organization?

Communication is the main way to reduce delays and work better. By facilitating access to a more effective means of communication, we have better clarification between departments and employees when it comes to finding solutions to their problems.

What is most valuable?

The use of video conferencing is an excellent tool to avoid the expenses associated with displacements of professionals who need to be in a meeting with other members. With this function, all guests can be in their own offices, homes, or elsewhere. At the time of the call, everyone will be in a virtual room.

What needs improvement?

The use of multiple users making calls from both audio conferencing and video conferencing requires a good connection to the internet. If one of the users has a poor internet connection, this failure will compromise the meeting, causing delays and distortions in the communications.

For how long have I used the solution?

Between one and three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The product has good stability, but it depends on the speed of internet bandwidth. A good connection is required for smooth operation.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It has excellent scalability since it integrates with all sectors of the company. All of our needs are met.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is very good. The procedures and services performed by them are very clear and objective.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

How was the initial setup?

The implementation was very easy, as the program installer itself is very intuitive.

What about the implementation team?

We have an internal IT team that performs all of the implementation procedures.

What was our ROI?

In less than six months we were able to achieve the ROI with clearance.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

To realize value from the purchase of Skype Business, you need to take advantage of all the important functions of the program. These features include audio conferencing and video conferencing calls. Otherwise, the cost becomes high.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We had already known about the quality of this tool before joining the service, so we did not evaluate other options.

What other advice do I have?

Skype Business is the best program that performs this type of service, and it is a benchmark in the market.

For communication needs among users who are in the habit of doing work on the road, it is necessary to have a good connection to the internet for the satisfactory functioning of mobile devices such as phones and tablets.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Computer Maintenance Technician at GTP Sistemas S.L at GTP Sistemas S.L
Real User
Although seemingly obvious, I would note that the call quality is excellent.

What is our primary use case?

  • Firstly, it is an innovative and even more profitable way of communicating. Also, the product offers a very professional image, which is very useful to the organization. Thanks to the interface, quality, design and easy handling, it allows for establishing a better relationship.
  • Secondly, in terms of conversations whether via voice or video call, Skype for Bussiness meets the necessary criteria and with respect to the costs, it is profitable, plus it can be used in various equipment and operating systems which is another advantage.

How has it helped my organization?

Skype for Business has improved the communication system in my organization. It is not just a mere implementation; it is something that will undoubtedly influence the productive system likewise, especially in a company where operations are relatively small. 

Despite having few members, the use of this product strengthens the communication links and not only internally, it has also been used with some suppliers, partners, and friends, which has been a pleasant experience.

What is most valuable?

One of the most useful functions has been its use for calls. Although seeming obvious, it should be noted that the quality I would say is excellent, and the plans offered by the product are superb, also, the image represents the product strength of my organization and without a doubt, it is something innovative.

What needs improvement?

Specifically in the service area: Since my organization is in charge of repair and maintenance service of computer equipment, and also works internally in communication with members who bring about growth in the company, to include any functionality would be a service that transmits data stored in the cloud, in the form that can be saved, and also to send and receive useful files.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
AVP - Cyber Secuirty at Cloud4C Services
MSP
Enables our teams to have real-time collaboration
Pros and Cons
  • "It has benefited my organization because I can use it on the phone, I can use it on a laptop, wherever I want. The communication channel is very easy now and I can call and chat. It's experienced. Together, my team manages everything. It's very easy."
  • "We have found that there is a lag because it cannot integrate with the internal landline."

How has it helped my organization?

It has benefited my organization because I can use it on the phone, I can use it on a laptop, wherever I want. The communication channel is very easy now and I can call and chat. It's experienced. Together, my team manages everything. It's very easy.

What is most valuable?

There are many valuable features. For collaboration purposes, there are many motivation integrations.

What needs improvement?

We have found that there is a lag because it cannot integrate with the internal landline. It's easier to integrate in the U.S.

We use a link as a browser calling so only calling is available. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Skype for Business for one year. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

You need to follow the guidelines for the HN to be built on multiple servers and multiple in procedures. It's not a big challenge. The stability and the scalability are not a big challenge at all.

We haven't received high availability. There is no problem because you need to follow their guidelines, build the HN high availability solutions. We don't have an issue. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There are 900 users who use it in my company. It's used on a daily basis. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Microsoft support is fantastic. I don't have any problems.

What other advice do I have?

People are working from home and this collaboration is efficient and we see real-time collaboration happening from the teams. This is a very good solution for work from home concepts.

In the next release, I would like to see the ability to do group calling. 

I would rate Sype for Business a nine out of ten. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Software Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Beneficial instant messaging, straightforward installation, but documentation needs improvement
Pros and Cons
  • "Skype for Business is good for meetings and instant messaging."
  • "Skype for Business could improve by having a document channel or repository. Microsoft Teams has a better repository place for documents that you can share with your team. You can access it anywhere from any device."

What is our primary use case?

We use Skype for Business for virtual meetings and messages.

What is most valuable?

Skype for Business is good for meetings and instant messaging.

What needs improvement?

Skype for Business could improve by having a document channel or repository. Microsoft Teams has a better repository place for documents that you can share with your team. You can access it anywhere from any device.

The documentation for Skype for Business could improve.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Skype for Business for approximately three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Skype for Business is a stable solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of Skype for Business was good.

My company has many global employees, approximately 6,000 and everyone was using Skype for Business before we switched to Microsoft Teams.

How are customer service and support?

The technical support from Skype for Business was reliable.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used previously many other solutions, such as IBM and Microsoft Teams.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. It is not a complicated process.

What about the implementation team?

I did the implementation myself.

We did not have an explicit technical team from Skype for Business. We were using our local IT team of six engineers who was managing it in case of any issues.

What other advice do I have?

I would not recommend Skype for Business because Microsoft Teams has more features, a lightweight application that I access on my mobile. Additionally, I can chat with my teammates and anybody else in the organization. The document repository is useful. I have access to SharePoint which is easily available and I can access it from the mobile device at any time. If I was to compare Microsoft Teams and Skype for Business, I would recommend Microsoft Teams. However, if the only requirement is to have meetings, chats, or instant messaging, then Skype for Business is not a bad choice.

I rate Skype for Business a six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Senior Consultant at Unify Square
Real User
How Much do I Have to Spend to Bring Microsoft Lync to My Company?

Disclaimer: the new version of Lync Server 2013, Skype for Business (SfB) Server 2015, has been released a few weeks ago. Licensing model is the same you had for Lync Server, with companies paying only Front End servers (i.e. the ones hosting user accounts and the core services for your infrastructure).  SfB contains some new features, including support for Back End availability based on AlwaysOn groups. I will write a dedicated post asap.     


The costs related to Microsoft Lync are something that I have talked about more than once but this is the first time I try to summarize information in a single document. I will limit my reflections to on-premises organizations, because as I am writing, Lync Online has no serious support for Enterprise Voice (i.e. VOIP) and this makes the Cloud version of Lync less flexible (and somewhat less interesting) than the more traditional, corporate deployment.

Your House, Your Rules

A starting point for all cost-related considerations is to understand which kind of service we need. Lync Server 2013 supports solutions ranging from a single, all-in-one box (with a mandatory Office Web Apps server required to share PowerPoint presentations) to hundreds of servers geographically dispersed. Let us list some parameters.

1. Number of Users

The first parameter you have to establish is the number of users that will require Lync services. Lync 2013 Standard Edition (S.E.), the aforementioned single box, is tested to support up to 5,000 users. Obviously, before you reach the 4,999th Lync enabled account, it could be a good idea to add a second Front End (the server that delivers core services to the users) or consider a Lync Enterprise Edition (E.E.) solution (more details on the two editions of Lync Server 2013 are explained in the next paragraph)

2. Required Availability

Second parameter will be the required level of availability. If we deem service continuity as required for any of the Lync features (especially if we are going to use Lync as our VOIP system), it should be in a high availability deployment. Lync pools support a feature called Pool Pairing, if we have at least a couple of Lync 2013 S.E. Front End servers in our infrastructure.

It is not an H.A. solution, but adds resiliency to the solution and it grants some degree of survivability to the voice users. In a paired pool, using a series of scripts, we are also able to fail-over and fail-back Lync users, restoring full functionality for them. A highly available solution requires the E.E. of Lync Server 2013.

Although there is no difference in the cost of licenses between S.E and E.E., to use Enterprise Edition you must have at least pool of three Front Ends connected to a separate SQL Server database (whereas S.E. uses a collocated SQL Server express at no additional cost).

A dedicated SQL infrastructure would also require a continuity solution, like clustering or mirroring. A well-known rule of thumb is if we need to provide high availability, then we need to remove any potential Single Point of Failure in the design.

Small, remote offices might also require (at least) voice survivability. For such a scenario, we have a dedicated implementation of Lync Server 2013, the Survivable Branch Appliances (SBA); these are less expensive than a full-blown Lync front-end server.

Note: SQL licensing for Lync Server 2013 has been deep dived in a good post from fellow MVP Thomas Poett in his blog Lync Server 2013: Lync Backend SQL Server Licensing http://lyncuc.blogspot.it/2014/01/lync-server-2013-lync-backend-sql.html

Availability requirements have an impact also on point 3 and 5 of this list.

3. Additional Servers

Lync requires some additional servers that have no additional cost from the Lync server licensing point of view but that add costs to acquire the base Operating System, hardware and so on.

  • At least a Lync 2013 Edge server and a reverse proxy are required to make our services available to users outside our corporate network
  • The only Lync role that requires a Lync server license is the Front End. All other additional roles like Mediation, Director and the aforementioned Edge are not subject to additional Lync server licensing
  • At least an Office Web Apps server is required (as I said before) if PowerPoint sharing is required
  • If we have high-availability requirements, the aforementioned services should be redundant through an edge pool, a highly-available reverse proxy and an Office Web Apps farm
  • Lync integrate with Exchange Unified Messaging (UM) for services like voice mail. Exchange will have its own requirements and costs, but we have to keep them in mind if we require UM-related services
  • A Lync 2013 E.E. pool requires a dedicated load balancer to balance certain type of traffic from the pool. This may be provided in the form of a physical or virtual appliance. Remembering SPoF, load balancer should also require an additional standby device for resiliency.

Note: Every Lync, Office Web Apps, SQL database and reverse proxy (if you are going to use a solution based on Windows Server) will require a license for the Operating System. You could use virtualization rights (Licensing for Virtual Environments https://www.microsoft.com/licensing/about-licensing/virtualization.aspx ) to keep costs down, but this aspect is to be included in the list

4. Client Licenses

For the following point, I will quote my free e-book Microsoft Lync Server 2013: Basic Administration (http://gallery.technet.microsoft.com/office/Lync-Server-2013-Basic-0a86824d )

Lync requires a CAL (Client Access License) for each user or machine that logs on to the server. CALs are of three types and each one is entitled to the use of a part of the features. Access to premium functionality is determined by adoption of the Standard CAL and then you have to add supplemental CALS, an Enterprise CAL and, for some additional features, a third license called Plus CAL (you may think to Enterprise CAL and Plus CAL as supplemental to the Standard CAL).

  • Standard CAL: offers IM (Instant Messaging) and Presence, as well as PC-PC audio and video communication
  • Enterprise CAL: the user can use multi-party Lync meetings (including Gallery View, a feature allowing up to five active video streams to be displayed at once)
  • Plus CAL: enables enterprise voice capabilities

5. Infrastructure costs

There are a couple of entries in the bill of materials not directly related to Lync, but that we have to consider anyway:

  • If we are going to use Lync Server 2013 as our telephony infrastructure, we will require access to the public telephony system. There are a lot of offers and solutions from hundreds of providers worldwide, so an exact cost estimation is tough to outline here. Granting high availability will raise the costs here too, adding mandatory backup lines in case of a failure on our provider’s side
  • Lync Server 2013 has a high level of security by default and requires digital certificates to function. While our internal infrastructure can work with a corporate Certification Authority (C.A.), if we plan to make our Lync services available to Internet users (and to federate them with external Unified Communication systems) we have to use commercial certificates from a well-known, third party C.A. The cost here is not something to underestimate, because digital certificates will have to be SAN with many alternative names inside. In addition, the more SIP domains we will manage with our Lync deployment, the more names we will need in the certificates, and certificate fees are likely to ramp-up further.

Summarizing

Now, as it is easy to understand from the previous list, there is no right answer to the starting question. I will try to focus a few points:

    1.High Availability will raise the costs, as usual

    2.Using Lync Enterprise Voice will add license and infrastructure costs (as well as making H.A. almost mandatory)

    3.The number of users and their level of access to Lync’s features will impact budget both for the deployment sizing and for the needed client licenses

    4.The bulk part of the expenditure items related to a Lync deployment are not related to Lync server licensing, but to the other voices we have seen

Alessio Giombini contributed to this review. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Skype for Business Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: April 2024
Product Categories
Virtual Meetings
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Skype for Business Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.