Likelihood to Recommend It is suited for applications like computerizing messages, or any business thought that would require the entrepreneur to robotize their reactions, particularly assuming they are managing a ton of clients and they can't answer to every single one of them. It'd be the most ideal to computerize messages of enormous associations where the reactions measure up to the clients' assumptions. It would be less appropriate in associations where clients' viewpoints matter and every client is interesting and requires the association's consideration, where the specialist organization doesn't need to sum up the clients' interests.
Read full review Perfect for companies that have agents all over the place, e.g., different offices or WFH. Also good for companies that aren't big enough to have a "phone guy" as this platform allows IT to do the phone work as it doesn't require esoteric knowledge like other phone systems.
Read full review Pros Real-time communication. Lightweight software protocols. Read full review Fairly simple GUI designer tool to define the Contact Flows. There are only a few elements, but they aren't many Design Widgets types, but just enough to get you started to the majority to the use cases you might encounter. There are plenty of opportunities to improve and enhance, but considering how "young" the product is, I think Zoom did a good job to provide a good Contact Center solution for the entry-to-medium level customers/users without needing to have a dedicated Contact Center resident expert to take care of the solution. The way the Queues are define, embeds in a fairly simple matter many of Call Handlings Contact Flows design like Timers, Overflow handling, Callback keeping the position in the Queue handling, etc. These things are defined directly into the queue so you don't have to build the logic for it into the Contact Flow design itself. That includes in many cases prompt handling and timers. Their Low-Code/No-Code motto comes handy when it comes to embed Chat Engagement Channels into Web Pages, where embedding a simple "iframe little piece of XML definition to call a JavaScript Applet" into a Web Page is all that is needed. Having the "Contact Center App" just embedded into the Existing Zoom Client App is another plus I see: Agents that are force to wear "multiple hats" handling regular phone calls and Contact Center calls, don't have to waste time switching apps, other than the productivity ones so it is one less App the Agents and Supervisor need to worry about. Read full review Cons They have simplified the coding for the bot in Azure, but it would help if the coding was further simplified so that non-IT can operate [and] create it easily. Read full review The Teams dashboard for monitoring agents needs some customization options. Friendly names, I would like to be able to name a number and when it rings you can see the name of the number. Point flows at flows would be nice, instead of flows to queues only. Read full review Usability Azure Bot Service provides an integrated environment for bot development. Microsoft Azure Cloud is fully compatible and its security features. It's more important to pay attention to the logic of business than the specifics of each messenger. We don't have any issues using the bot framework because the implementation is excellent.
Read full review Support Rating Support is helpful when we have a problem, but online documentation is lacking
Read full review Alternatives Considered Microsoft Bot Framework is much better and well more established without a lot of proprietary software/coding language. Lex is very limited with integration with standard hardware and network configurations. Lex has performance issues and was too slow to meet near real-time collaboration requirements. Bot Framework complements many other Microsoft communication products and this was key to implementing without a lot of new training required.
Read full review There are options and ways to get to specific feature sets that are similar to what Zoom can offer. Many of the Zoom included features are add-ons for the RingCentral offering. So cost goes up and can also be an add-on difficulties/deployment costs as well. When we reviewed the features needed and the cost comparison, Zoom was less than half the cost with many of the features baked in as opposed to add-ons
Read full review Return on Investment Interfaces with the SQL data set, tracks down plans/replies, and tests them with the SDK. Utilizing the system is made conceivable by the Bot Dev gateway. We can interface our bot in excess of ten channels, including Twilio Facebook, Twilio, Twilio, and Slack, and that's only the tip of the iceberg. It is expensive. Read full review We migrated away from a telephony system that was antiquated and almost unusable for what we wanted to do, so Zoom has been a huge improvement for us! We're continuing to roll out new channels of contact for customers -- Calls, chat, video, email, etc. We're still getting our sea legs from a reporting perspective, and that could always be better, but so far the biggest improvement was for our staff actually using the software. They really enjoy the simplicity and robustness of the software. Read full review ScreenShots