Zoom Reviews

I primarily use Zoom for video networking calls. I frequently join Zoom calls, Google calls, and other platforms when needed. As a professional, I am often on different Zoom and Google calls.

Zoom is an excellent tool for networking where a number of people can join, each speaking to one another, and appearing on screen. It allows for video and audio switching, and meetings can be segmented into breakout rooms for smaller group interactions. These features significantly enhance its utility as a conferencing tool.

There is room for improvement in Zoom, though I cannot pinpoint specifics. Issues such as stability, particularly when many people are involved, may arise due to bandwidth rather than Zoom itself. However, Zoom could benefit from enhancements to manage large participant volumes.

When there is a large number of people in a call, the stability can become an issue, which might be attributed to either network or software. However, it's often tied to network bandwidth rather than Zoom's software.

Up to three hundred participants can join without significant issues. Larger numbers may require more specific examination regarding stability.

I also use Google Meet, which is available for free.

Zoom installation is straightforward, and even those unfamiliar with the software should not find it challenging to install.

I use the free version of Zoom and have not encountered significant issues in its use. I also use the free version of Google Meet.

I use both Zoom and Google Meet.

Zoom performs well and does what users expect. It can be rated an eight out of ten. It fulfills its purpose efficiently without significant issues.

I haven't used Zoom for personal meetings, but we used to use it at my university. A few of our clients also use Zoom, so they connect with us through it. I have a bit of experience with Zoom, but I haven't used it extensively.

I haven't been using Zoom in my organization. A few of our clients also use it.

Just for online classes. I think we can skip the interview for Zoom because I haven't used it for anything other than online classes.

Overall, the UI was fine. Performance was fine. Everything was good. I had no problems for the time I was using it.

Maybe the UI could be improved a bit. Plus, it would be helpful if all the chat history was maintained, even between calls. If I'm chatting during a call, I'd like that chat to be available later.

Zoom have some control over the number of users who can interact at a single time, but I'm not sure about the specifics.

I have experience with this product. 

It is a stable product. I haven't faced any issues. Maybe our network stability was the issue sometimes. But Zoom itself is always stable.

I've been in a call with around a thousand students. So, it was quite scalable.

I haven't used Zoom's tech support. 

We use Teams professionally. Personally, I've only used Zoom a couple of times.

I still prefer Teams because I'm used to it. Teams is the perfect solution if you want to collaborate on an enterprise level. I don't know if it's more expensive than Zoom, but overall, I love Teams.

I think using Teams makes more sense for me. I can create a group there, and I have access to all the tabs. Teams are better for meetings.

Zoom setup is pretty much straightforward. I've always used Zoom through Chrome, so we didn't need to deploy it. But the overall cloud setup wasn't a challenge. It's very straightforward.

There was just one guy who has to create the calls and pay the bill. Just a single admin.

Everything was fine. But I would rate it a six out of ten.

We use it for all these virtual meetings – mainly official, predominantly official. Maybe at times, it could be for personal reasons also, but more than 95% of the time, I use it for work purposes only.

We are a team located across various locations. Not in the same geographic location. We are distributed.

And it's not possible to physically travel and meet people.

Sometimes it's simply not possible. But Zoom has helped us tremendously in collaborating with each other and getting our work done. Without Zoom, it would have been very, very difficult.

The breakout rooms feature is also helpful. For example, I have a meeting attended by hundreds of people  and want to create subgroups. I typically use it for different role-play scenarios during training if we are trying to conduct some training on presentation skills.

So there's a large group, which is initially trained by an instructor. Then you get instructions that the room will be split into smaller breakout rooms. I'll give you a topic, and you'll practice in these smaller groups. That's one way I use it.

So it's like a simulation of a real brainstorming session I'd have in a physical space.

There are many valuable features. Security is one – you can lock Zoom meetings when you find that all the participants have joined so that there are no intruders. 

You can put anyone in a waiting room to make sure you know who is trying to join, and then you can let them in. There's a breakout room feature, which is fantastic. 

And, the common features like sharing content and stuff like that. Overall, it is a very user-friendly product.

The video quality of the free version might not be as good as the enterprise edition, but that's fair since it's free. It would be nice if Zoom improved that. But, I'm not expecting the best quality video when I'm using it for free.

I currently use it. I use the latest version. 

I've never experienced any instability. It's always been stable for me. Unless there's an issue with my own internet connectivity, Zoom runs smoothly.

The video quality is good since it depends on your internet connection. If you have a decent connection, there are no problems with video quality.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

That's one more thing I wanted to highlight – Zoom is extremely scalable. Performance never dips.

I've attended Zoom meetings with more than 200 people all across the globe, and there's no issue. The performance remains great.

Everybody in my company uses it. Zoom is the primary medium of communication for virtual meetings in our organization. Microsoft Teams is also available, but it's not popular. Zoom is the standard unless someone specifically requests Teams for compatibility with a client.

I have also used Microsoft Teams. Even in my company, nobody uses it unless we specifically need to for compatibility with a customer.

Zoom is better than Microsoft Teams in terms of user experience and ease of use.

We switched to Zoom for two reasons:

• First, the user experience in Zoom is the best among all the virtual meeting platforms I've used. 
• Second, it's the standard in our organization. For official purposes, it's the preferred method, and even for personal calls, I choose Zoom.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with one being difficult and ten being easy. 

There's basically no setup. If you want to install the app, you can. If you don't want to install it, you can just start using it right from your browser.

It can be on-premises or cloud-based. And the third option is that you don't install it at all – we can start accessing it from the browser. So you have complete flexibility. It's not really restricted to a particular deployment option.

So it's a matter of minutes to either deploy or start working within the browser. It's really quick and easy.

If you want to install it, it can take a few minutes. If you choose not to install, you can start using it right from your browser immediately.

For personal use, I use the free version of Zoom, so I haven't paid anything.

I've used Zoom for official purposes within my organization and for chatting with friends using the free version. 

I've used other virtual platforms like Webex, Teams, and Skype, and Zoom definitely stands out. So, I found the things that were lacking in other products present in Zoom.

I would recommend it for the following reasons: 

1. If you're looking for a scalable solution, go for Zoom. It offers the same level of performance regardless of the number of participants. I've personally experienced it with up to around 300 participants. 
2. Zoom is extremely user-friendly and easy to pick up. 
3. Plus, you have complete flexibility – use it in your browser, install the desktop app, or use the mobile app.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

There is a large energy company that only uses Zoom. When I have meetings with them, they are always called via Zoom. I wouldn't initiate it; I need to have a Zoom account. I don't use many features besides setting up a meeting.

When I had meetings, I used to take notes or record them, but then someone still had to transcribe everything. Now, I'm fascinated by OtterPilot. It automatically transcribes meetings, summarizes them, and identifies action items. I've been recommending it to everyone I know. It is a tool that you can use during Zoom or Teams calls. It takes real-time notes and then sends a summary and action items to everyone via email. It's been really helpful for about three or four years now.

The most valuable feature for me is the integration with platforms. They're all moving towards providing transcripts, but I want a summary of the key points discussed and the action items, so everyone can quickly understand and follow up on them.

The tool integrates with Microsoft Outlook, but the integration with Teams is better than with Zoom. It's functional but could be tighter. 

While Zoom calls are great for talking and chatting, they often lack follow-up on action items and collaboration. Most of the time, it's just talking and listening without much progress. There's a missing piece in these tools. About 90 percent of those calls could be replaced by other tools that focus more on the deliverables that make a real impact rather than just being another wasted meeting. It doesn't improve collaboration. 

Screen sharing and chat functionality are helpful for productivity, but they could be improved. Finding the screen-sharing button can be tricky, and the process isn't always easy. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I am not impressed with the tool's support. It was a bit chaotic how things were organized. It felt like there was a lack of coordination, even regarding my account or tasks. Eventually, things got done, but it took a while. The organization seemed disjointed, with people unsure of their roles and relying on others to solve problems.

Neutral

Teams is great because it works well with Microsoft. Webex feels old and outdated compared to newer tools like Slack. It's like it's stuck in the past and doesn't have much of a future. Teams is robust and rock solid because of Microsoft. It's extremely well integrated with everything, and you feel secure using it.

Webex's user interface is not up to par, and it lacks the modern features you find in tools like Slack. While they may add a few functions here and there, Webex doesn't seem to have much of a future compared to Teams or other more advanced tools.

If I were to rank them, Webex would be at the bottom. I'm not impressed with Google Meet either. Then it's Zoom, followed by Huddle and Teams. Teams is at the top because it's robust and integrates well with many things. Huddle is catching up fast and is close behind Teams, in my opinion.

I rate the overall product a six out of ten. 

I've been using the solution for different vendor meetings and training.

The most valuable features of Zoom are quick connectivity, screen sharing, and quick response. The solution provides good video and sound quality. The solution's screen-sharing and presentation capabilities are really good. Normally, I use the solution for remote meetings.

The solution’s stability could be improved.

I have been using Zoom for four to five years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

Over 100 users are using the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

I have previously used Microsoft Teams and Skype for Business.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team in two minutes. When you click on the Zoom meeting link, you are redirected to the site, where you can automatically download it. We're using Zoom as a third-party tool, and it's not our main communication tool.

Zoom is easy to use, easy to deploy, and easy to organize meetings and webinars.

I am not paying any licensing costs for the solution.

The solution's security features are effective in protecting our meetings. I would recommend the solution to other users because it is stable, reliable, and easy to use. The solution's user interface is user-friendly and intuitive.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Zoom has better connectivity and the failure ratio is less compared to Webex and GoToWebinar. The base infrastructure is robust. The latency is very good. That is why the tool is pricey. The vendor provides hosting and poll features. Zoom is a complete product. It has a good security layer. Every platform has its own security layer to ensure that the data and broadcast are restricted and relayed to only the registered participants. Anyone can easily handle the solution. It is easy to learn.

The solution is pricier than its competitors.

We have been using Zoom for internal and client calls.

Since we work with clients, we have around 100 to 200 users.

We contacted the support team for some activation with Brevo. We wanted to integrate the Brevo platform with events or webinars. The support structure is good. The team replies within a short duration and tries to answer our queries.

We extensively depend on GoToWebinar and Webex. Zoom is a little costlier than GoToWebinar and Webex. Zoom and Webex have very good security layers. RingCentral has a very good suite including in-house messaging and IP phone call features that enable users to get a private number for their organization.

It would be better if people started with Webex. If we need to do more than 10 to 15 webinars a month, we can choose Zoom. If we have fewer events and one or two webinars in a month, we can choose GoToWebinar or other tools like RingCentral. Zoom is better for the internal purposes of a company. Webex or other platforms are better suited for external clients. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I use the tool daily as a project manager. I conduct scrum calls for my team, which are spread across multiple locations and geographies. I host daily conferences, planning meetings, and other necessary work-related discussions via Zoom. Additionally, we hold review meetings with the product managers. These sessions involve video conferences with the product managers as well.

Zoom has facilitated our remote and hybrid meetings, particularly in the context of our agile processes such as scrum. In the past, estimating story points required physical presence in a room, where we would use visual cues or hand gestures. We can create polls with Zoom and share them with team members for direct input. The recording feature is also good. Additionally, features like whiteboarding allow for specific collaboration sessions tailored to different team members' needs. Auto-scheduling meetings and integration with Microsoft Outlook make organizing and attending meetings effortless. Overall, the product is good and convenient. 

The screen sharing and whiteboarding features are particularly valuable. We utilize whiteboarding when someone needs to explain something remotely. It allows for the quick creation of visual aids and animated views. Additionally, the seamless recording feature is highly beneficial.

The tool's security features are good. There is no overlapping of any other calls with this call. Many security features are enabled, like for the call you are hosting. If it coincides with some other meeting, Zoom allows us to prevent other persons from joining this meeting and then deal with it. So there are specific options for that, which is quite helpful. Sometimes, we run over time, and we may not have the time to onboard new participants. The tool automatically pushes them into a separate meeting group. They understand that we are busy on a separate call and are not disturbed by the current meeting.

I don't have any particular issues, but I think the user interface could be improved. Previously, I used Microsoft Teams, where the chat, video, and audio options were all easily accessible in one place, making the user experience smoother. In Zoom, it's a bit more manual. For example, we must use external chat options like Slack and manually send the Zoom URL link to initiate a chat. In MicrosoftTeams, you can directly call and chat with someone from the contact list simultaneously.

I have been working with the product for two and a half years. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate Zoom as a nine point five out of ten regarding scalability. It's highly scalable and seamless, with minimal hiccups compared to other platforms like Teams, where there might be some integration lag. Currently, more than 10,000 users are using Zoom in our company. As of now, we don't have plans to increase usage further,

I haven't had the opportunity to contact Zoom's tech support because everything has been running smoothly. Our organization has a separate team that handles Zoom requests, and they interact with it's proprietary support team on our behalf. So far, I haven't encountered any issues requiring me to contact them.

Apart from Zoom and Microsoft Teams, Google Meet is another option we considered in our company. However, we ultimately chose Zoom because it was already adopted by our organization, and it integrates well with Outlook and Slack, which we heavily rely on for communication.

I rate the solution's deployment a ten out of ten. Microsoft Teams is more difficult to install than Zoom. Zoom's mobile setup is also easy. Deployment takes five to ten minutes to complete. 

The tool's pricing is reasonable. I think we get discounts as an organization. 

Due to its whiteboard features, I recommend Zoom for remote working. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

The video quality has improved a lot since we first started using Zoom. There were some issues in the beginning, but many of them have been sorted out now. The company's history is evolving; many improvements were made when Zoom first became the go-to for helping people do remote meetings. The audio quality has also improved. We had big issues at the beginning where the audio would either stutter or you couldn't hear someone.

Zoom helps you to share your screen and allows someone to take remote control during Zoom meetings. Compared with other platforms like Teams and Webex, it's on par.

One of the key features is the transcription function. Zoom can automatically transcribe the conversation and save it once it's complete. Also, the conversation recording can be done automatically, stored, and referenced later. So if someone took a call, spoke to someone, and said, 'I told them this and this,' I, as an admin, can go in and listen to that recorded conversation, validate that point, and have a little bit of the transcript to review.

The solution could be cheaper.

I have been using Zoom for a couple of years.

We've had a couple of issues. Sometimes, the phones drop out or upgrade the handset during a period of time, and then that handset is unavailable until the update is complete. There could be configuration issues. 

25 users use Zoom daily, particularly technicians who perform on-site tasks. Their Howell phone serves as their primary communication tool. For internal calls received via the Zoom app, they promptly respond. Similarly, if a salesperson is on-site and an incoming call rings the office number while no one is present, they will likely answer and represent the company. Zoom is extensively used and is a vital tool within the business, upon which they heavily rely.

Microsoft Teams is an alternative. People would have an Office 365 subscription and pay for Teams anyway. Many customers use Microsoft Teams because they're already paying for the license to use Outlook or Office.

The initial setup is straightforward but requires time, depending on your setup. We use Zoom for our phone calls. We will go through the steps to record the answering of the call and the options and then address any doubts. If you're going to set it up, you need to invest at least half a day to a day to configure all that stuff and have it work. Once you do it, it's done. You don't have to do it again. It is pretty easy to navigate and configure. You don't need to reference many manuals or instructions to achieve that.

They use a licensing model based on a per-user basis for enterprise rather than per version or end device. For example, one user logging in from a handset can also log in from a phone, and it's still technically under the same license. You can be at an office, use a desk phone, and then leave the office while still running the Zoom app on the phone using the same license.

Zoom has a high price point. Newer alternatives are coming with low prices.

If you want to start up quickly and get everything configured, Zoom is a good option. If you're a new startup or business and need a business line with an operator and all the backing of a company that answers phones and can send you to different extensions, Zoom is a good option to pick up and deploy quickly.

People within the office can participate in normal phone calls and answer the office number even though they work remotely from home. Zoom facilitates that quite well. They can run it directly on their phone; they don't need the handset at the desk connected to the back end.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven and a half out of ten.