Coda, from Coda Project headquartered in San Francisco, is a template-based document generation solution, supporting a variety of use cases presented by the vendor as ideal for smaller companies that might otherwise be relying on spreadsheets to maintain (for instance) product development, or inventory tracking. It is available free, with paid editions to support teams, automations, or for more advanced collaboration and workspace features, as well as more advanced security features.
$0
per month
Webex Meetings
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Webex Meetings is a video conferencing solution powering hybrid work. It enables a seamless collaboration experience and better results with meetings that are designed to give everyone the ability to engage no matter their location, language, or communication style.
$11.95
per month
Pricing
Coda
Webex Meetings
Editions & Modules
Free
$0.00
per month
Pro
$10.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Team
$30.00
per month per doc maker; unlimited editors (paid annually)
Enterprise
Custom Pricing
Webex Free
$0.00
user/month
Webex Meet
$14.50
user/month
Webex Suite: Meet + Call Plan
$25.00
user/month
Enterprise
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Coda
Webex Meetings
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Yes
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
With Coda, you only pay for Doc Makers.
Often one person creates a doc, others edit it, and some simply observe from afar. Instead of charging for everyone, we only charge for the people who create docs.
Interested in enterprise pricing? Visit coda.io/enterprise
Webex Meetings are available at no cost to users. They are included in the Webex Suite, starting at $11.95 per user/per month for Enterprise Agreements.
My organization considers Coda for a variety of business and organizational projects. Using Coda, my organization keeps a lot of data and different types of data in one place. The user interface of Coda is very fluid and easy to use. My organization has benefitted from using the efficient and effective operational functionality of Coda.
Overall Webex meetings is a very good meeting application which we are using regularly. It's data privacy and security feature is the good drawback for use and recommended to our Govt clients. Sometimes it creates disruption during huge no.of attendees like video buffering, audio not clear. It is not appropriate for beginners.
On boarding process is so strong and the application itself is easy to use.
The camera on or off function works great and I find it very easy to mute and unmute myself so calls are quiet when needed.
I like the fact that it connects easily and over different time zones and I can add as many people as I can to the meeting as possible at one time without breaking up.
It takes getting used to in terms of how the formulas per column is implemented, in contrast to how we build tables in Excel. For organization/team purchase, it would be worth considering having a training for the core team of users. Right now, we do a lot of self-learning.
Inability to email charts or image without these objects being hosted on a third party. The community has been great in providing workarounds but it would be much more convenient to be able to have such ability natively.
APAC Support. I'm based in Malaysia, due to timezone differences, even with a livechat implemented, the support for each step and conversation takes up to 24 hours per response. Having some hours covered in our timezone would greatly improve customer support experience.
Coda is definitely something that has been proven to drive positive impact in our organization. We have many divisions that can benefit from this that we have yet to explore. It would definitely be worth renewing.
Cisco Webex Meetings is a platform that consistently performs well and outperforms some of the other solutions that we have used, such as Zoom. It is user friendly and helps our organization accomplish the goal of connecting with external contacts to conduct meetings and share information
Coda can seem either really useful or really useless. The extremes of both ends is driven by what our own understanding of what we want to implement. If we lack this understanding, it will be easy to misunderstand Coda's usability especially in the wrong context.
Webex Meetings does not provide enough audio feedback for users with visual disabilities to properly navigate the tool. Students, faculty, and staff who are blind or have low vision may not be able to use Webex Meetings. Users with motor disabilities that navigate via keyboard, may not be able to navigate the web conferencing session enough to participate fully.
So personally I have never faced any kind of meeting unavailability issue while scandaling meeting with WebEx the bandwidth is really good and in terms of application performance the same is my opinion what I mentioned for availability it is good and the objective of communication is quite fruitfully achieved with a simple and effective product like WebEx which is often bundled with the purchase of course which is which we have at our company and great discount is being offered so it is easy on our pocket. I really don't have any specific errors which have faced I should mention over here the operation or application uses is quite smooth.
We haven't done any integrations - the initial part of our experience we found that for docs with complex formulas, the page tends to load slowly but in recent months, Coda has improved and optimized the loading times in general and we generally don't find any problems in terms of speed anymore.
We use browsers to join Webex Meetings and it is very good no issue also appears from Webex APP is very organized and does not consume more resources of PC so no issues appeared. We join audio and video in many ways, all of which are good. We integrated it with active Microsoft Exchange with easy deployment.
Mainly due to timezone differences. I think Coda's support in general is well implemented and executed. They know their stuff and are helpful. But since I'm not in the same timezone, solution rates are slower for me, and that's not something I prefer. I work in customer service, too, and more often than not, time is important. Shortening the solution time would be a much greater experience.
The support cases can be opened instantly. The support engineers can support you via Telephone, E-Mail, WebEx Meetings, and My favorite WebEx application.24X7 Availability of the engineers. Step-by-step guidance is available by an engineer. https://help.webex.com/ - Great Site for instant FAQ's. https://status.webex.com/ - Is helpful to identify the updated schedule of WebEx or to know the server status of WebEx services.
It was straight to the point and very informative. effective training often includes clear explanations, hands-on practice opportunities, time for questions and answers, real-world examples, and follow-up support. If you're trying to assess the quality of a specific training session, you might consider these factors. For organizations looking to assess the quality of their in-person training, it's best to solicit feedback directly from the participants. This can be done through anonymous surveys or feedback sessions, enabling the organization to gather firsthand information and improve future training sessions accordingly.
User adoption is crucial for the success of any collaboration platform. Our organization provides training and education to users on how to use Webex effectively. Continuously online monitoring of user adoption rates and feedback to gauge the success of the implementation.Use analytics to track usage patterns and identify areas where further improvement or user training is needed.
I'm relatively inexperienced but this experience is meaningful. It would have been nice to have some guidance from Coda so that we understood more on Coda's purpose and potential.
That we needed complex implementation that we didn't get tells me 2 things: 1) the product was not designed in a way that "just worked" like some of its peers (Zoom / BlueJeans) and 2) had our company defined actual user needs and validated / verified that they had bought something that matched those, we would have pursued features / designs more closely aligned with what the product actually does: screen share, sometimes video, definitely VOIP audio (always an option regardless of license), and easy recording and retrieval of meetings.
While all of the products listed have great features and platforms, there was always one thing missing from them that I would need to get from another application. Coda was the first one we used that really combined some of the best parts of those products and allowed us to use it in one place. I also appreciate the flexibility of creating your own framework and workflow, unlike in other tools where you have to follow how they capture data and organize projects.
Meetings is the way to go! It blends in with our organization's workflow seamlessly. Teams is great but really suffers in the collaboration department from our personal experience. Webex Meetings is much more fleshed out. The features it has are much more convenient and easier to use. There was a bit of a learning curve, but once you are over that speedbump you are able to get much more use out of Webex Meetings.
I think scalability is definitely good here since it's based on number of doc makers. Implementation into each dept becomes simpler. That being said, due to the nature of our work, we find it easier that we have a "super user" and then a team of other doc makers. This would make the doc creation and management more efficient.
I can speak to multiple departments at my organization using Webex Meetings. It has been, and continues to be, our longest online meeting software. It has been deployed across the organization and each department uses it. As I have mentioned, our monthly all-organization Town Halls are hosted on Webex. We have also used it to broadcast a panel-based speaker event.
The costly nature of individual accounts across multiple schools made it difficult to maintain the budget when our student population grew exponentially.
Often communicated to clients and stakeholders that we were a trustworthy and elevated provider.
Limited engagement and interactive features with students often contributed to complaints around student engagement and buy-in.
