Cisco Meeting Server (discontinued) vs. Microsoft Teams

Cisco meeting Server can be used to host meeting for a small group 2 people and also can host meeting for hundreds of people. Even if the scalability increases no compromise in the call and consistent performance can be observed. The video quality is clear and there is no noticeable latency between audio and video. The recording feature is well placed and it helps a lot in rectifying and processing the important points that might have been left out during the meeting.

Incentivized

It is best suited for quickly finding answers and tracking them to where they need to go. A scenario where it is less appropriate may be something like a credit application, and overall contacting customers/residents. While it offers enterprise level security, that is likely not end-to-end when communicating with someone external. Also, for large files, I think Outlook is much better suited. I would also like to see a "shared files/links" section similar to iMessage on Apple devices so that you don't need to search chats for answers

Incentivized

• Integrates well with other devices
• More than 1 person can be on video call with minimal lag
• Quiet cost effective for a company with many employees

Incentivized

• Allows my team to communicate and set up smaller teams to share information appropriately.
• Allows me to send out and connect to clients over Face To Face communications.
• Allows me to coordinate between other MS products.
• Allows my team to share documents internally and with our clients.

Incentivized

• Allowing more user interaction rather than just video and audio.
• Split screen option to share content and view faces from those on the meeting.

Incentivized

• Microsoft Teams does rely on internet quality, so If you are needing information on found in Teams and your internet is down or choppy, you wont be able to access those files unlike if they were stored directly on your computer or network.
• Some of the user interface of Microsoft Teams is not user friendly, it can take a long time to figure out how to use some tool even if you are using the help or troubleshooting.
• Some of the Microsoft Teams features are limited to anyone using the free version vs. paid. With the paid, you have more storage, more video time, more tools. It would be nice to see the free version have the same features and ability.

Incentivized

because we're satisfied of the product

Incentivized

Microsoft Teams is included with our Office 365 subscription and we have no intention of migrating off of Office 365 and Microsoft products. Since Microsoft Teams is included for free with our Office 365 subscription, and since we enjoy all the features, benefits, and functionality, there is no question that our team will continue to use the product

Incentivized

very easy to use and quick to learn

Incentivized

Microsoft Team is quite simple to use, once you understand how it works. However, I find that explaining its use to a new user requires more software expertise than comparable software. Efficient use of the software is also not fast. Moreover, adding components requires a learning curve which also complicates its use for a person unfamiliar with the environment.

Incentivized

Rare, but outages do happen

Incentivized

Sometimes about once a week I get a message that says "Sorry, there seems to be something wrong". But it goes away in a few minutes.

Incentivized

I never used Support

Incentivized

The overall support provided by Microsoft for Microsoft Teams has been quite good but there is still some room for improvements. Microsoft needs to proactively work on fixing the open bugs in order to provide a seamless experience to the users. But over the service and experience provided by the Microsoft team have been quite satisfactory.

Incentivized

I find everything I need for my day-to-day work.

Incentivized

Apart from Cisco Meeting Server, only Poly offers full fledged on-premise meeting server. Their solution is called Polycom RealPresence
Collaboration Server. But there solutions are mostly outdated. Even though they have recently changes to subscription via Poly Clarity but servers are still very old. Whereas Cisco Meeting Server was recently updated and integrates well with WebEx and Cisco's other products.

Incentivized

We chose primarily because of the promised integration with the Microsoft Business Suite - which it mostly delivers on. That does give Teams an obvious advantage over competitors. IMHO Teams has a richer, more mature feature set, and the experience is more reliable and stable. Although like any of there there is room for imporvement.

Incentivized

Honestly, this tool is worth every penny. Yes, it's not free and you pay for the quality of services and the license. But the ROI and the benefits are all there. Also, the renewal, negotiation, and contract terms are all very well explained by our Microsoft account manager, and she's a charm.

It does not appear to have a limit to how many teams and employees we can have using it

Incentivized

I used Skype for Business to take calls, hold conferences, and provide remote assistance to users. Microsoft Teams, on the other hand, is superior to Skype for Business in my opinion. My job entails a lot of screen sharing.

• Good and robust collaboration tool which helped.
• Easy integration with surrounding tools like MS office was great advantage.
• Sharing recorded content wasn't easy, so had to use screen capture sometimes, which was not great.

Incentivized

• I'm not sure I can point to a specific ROI, but it has improved our ability to communicate and work more effectively together.
• It's also nice to have records of every interaction, photo, and document that has been shared. Less chance of something completely disappearing.

Incentivized