Google Voice is a free IP telephony service that provides users with one phone number that can be forwarded to multiple phones or devices. It includes features such as call forwarding, voicemail translation, text messaging, and voice calls. Fees may apply for international calling.
$10
per user/per month
HCL Sametime
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
HCL Sametime (formerly IBM Lotus Sametime, acquired by HCL Technologies from IBM in 2018) is an enterprise-level unified communications and VoIP platform. It includes features such as instant messaging, web conferencing, voice and video integration, telephony capabilities, and presence information.
N/A
Microsoft Teams
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Teams combines video conferencing software with team collaboration tools. The communications platform allows MS Office users to conduct conference calls and share files via SharePoint, and join or initiate a group chat.
$4.80
per month per user
Pricing
Google Voice
HCL Sametime
Microsoft Teams
Editions & Modules
Starter
$10
per user/per month
Standard
$20
per user/per month
Premier
$30
per user/per month
No answers on this topic
Microsoft Teams Essentials
$4.80
per month per user
Microsoft Teams Enterprise
$5.25
per month (paid yearly) per user
Microsoft Teams Enterprise
$5.25
per month per user
Microsoft 365 Business Basic
$7.20
per month per user
Microsoft 365 Business Standard
$15
per month per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Voice
HCL Sametime
Microsoft Teams
Free Trial
No
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
Discounts are available for non profit organizations.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Voice
HCL Sametime
Microsoft Teams
Considered Multiple Products
Google Voice
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Google Voice
Google Voice operates in a narrow niche compared to other high-volume call products, such as Gong and Outreach. Google Voice would be much better, structured for small teams with limited calling, less structure, and fewer call scripts. For instance, this would better serve a …
Google Voice definitely lacks features compared to enterprise-level solutions. Enterprise VoIP providers have a customer support component well in place. The interfaces for desktop and mobile are also much more refined, and they integrate well with the existing communication …
Google Voice at the peak of its adoption did serve as a very real and effective solution. However bugs persisted, and innovation lacked, and support for the product soon declined. However, there are several other solutions provided that focus on making one product as best as it …
I chose Google Voice for their seamless integration. Calls and text bundle and email alerts. While Skype had great quality calls a long time ago, I noticed their support team is horrible with many bugs and crashes. The call logs on Skype were not registering and sometimes it …
Google Voice stands far above products like Vonage, RingCentral, and Jive (GoToConnect). It is more mature as a VOIP product and free to home/personal users. For small usage scenarios like ours, Google Voice cannot be beat on price and ease of use. It is very affordable to keep …
Google Voice is way easier to get going and use. It's cheaper, more robust, and doesn't have any issues with the app not ringing or not transferring calls correctly. Plus, a lot of our employees already have experience using Google Voice with their personal accounts and found …
The integrations of Google Voice with all our devices are flawless, Android, iOS, Windows, Linux and Mac. Also, the call performance is far superior on wifi as well as on mobile data. With Skype, we had several problems with personal accounts, performance issues, and in …
FluentCloud/FluentStream is what we ended up using for our business. It too is easy to use, a little tougher to integrate, but not bad at all, and much cheaper. Does everything I need it to do. I would switch to Google Voice if it was cheaper as I use all the other Google …
Google Voice is easier to use, but in Skype you can have local numbers in different countries (not only in the US). Skype call rates are lower than Google Voice's rates for non-US numbers, check the rates according to your predicted usage.
Google Voice is great if you are a one-man business. It allows you to have a business phone number for people to call without having to give your personal cell phone number out to strangers. The cost is very affordable. But as your business grows, you need to look for a better …
Google Voice and Dialpad, I believe, are a very equal match, and we chose Google Voice due to only a small amount of interface differences that made a difference in the service's functionality. Also, we had used google voice for a long time before Dialpad, so making the …
Google Voice has the best interface, and is the easiest to use of all the phone services out there. It also is free! We love Google Voice because it gives us a free phone number that many people can use, so my entire team can have one unified number that employees can call and …
I primarily use Google Voice for texting, but I’ve also used EZ Texting for similar purposes. The main difference is that Google Voice excels at individual communications, while EZ Texting is best for mass texts. Google Voice texting does not cost anything, whereas EZ Texting …
Google Voice is much more cost efficient and doesn't have all the bells and whistles that our small company doesn't need. Google Voice never tries to upsell us and just makes an easy-to-use product that has greatly increased the efficiency of our organization. We aren't …
Google Voice performs similar communication activities compared to many other business service tools. However, one often must integrate other Google apps in order to fully experience the benefits that other platforms experience locally. Voice does have the benefit of merging …
Google Voice was a superior product in our opinion to some that we looked at because of its versatility and ease of implementation. Not only were those big determinants in our decision, but the cost-effectiveness of the program played a major role in our decision. Some of the …
Google Voice is more reliable than CallHippo and has better call quality. Additionally, Google Voice's integration into Google Hangouts expands it functionality for video calls. Google Voice also provides access into Google's contact directory giving quick access to anyone who …
Google Voice is hard to compare because on a cost basis it is so much lower than it's competitors. As a whole, I would say it's definitely lacking features compared to Nextiva, and a few from RingCentral but the service is reliable and it has the most commonly used core …
The price was a huge standout since we have a large number of users and because of this it was important for us. Aside from cost the reliability was also of utmost importance due to the urgent nature of some of the calls. These were the two main reasons we chose this platform.
Google Voice was perfect for the small team setting where we needed to coordinate calls from time to time with urgency and supported call forwarding in a manner consistent with the services we need to provide to our clients.
We have Cisco tools as a primary option for our VoIP needs due to it's more professional approach. However Google Voice has recently became a business level program as well. I'm happy to use it due to it's unique features and the flexibility as we always expect from Google.
Cisco Jabber and Teams are the competitors for HCL Sametime but the thing that makes Sametime better is the cost. Cisco and Microsoft are big players and have [higher license cost than] HCL Sametime has.
For a small and medium size companies HCL can be a recommended if they want …
Sametime is very similar to the other chats I have used, with some better features, such as the screenshot feature and file sharing, which demonstrates to be faster than the others.
We use Jabber globally in our company and Symphony (no relevant app in able list) in some of the teams as well. All these are instant messenger tools, but Sametime is the easiest one to be used and its chat history is easy to be searched. Sametime can be used to contact almost …
Slack is the best messaging app that I have used for work communication. Slack is actually so easy to use, and offers such a good mobile app, that I use it on my own for personal conversations. Slack offers many features that Sametime either doesn't or doesn't do well. We …
Text chat is text chat. It's not a technically hard problem to solve. It's when you try and move out of text chat into more fully featured applications that allow for audio or video calling, transcripts, etc, it becomes apparent that the developers on Sametime gave up a long …
Workplace is honestly much better than Sametime and is what our company is moving towards using. Workplace lets you do group chats, calls, videos, and is very similar to regular Facebook so it's easy for alot of people to pick up. Even if the user hasn't used Facebook before, …
Sametime's flexibility with regards to the options available is quite a compelling reason. For an on-premises solution, Sametime is great. One of the major benefits for current IBM Notes customers with the IBM Cloud option when compared to something like Skype is the seamless …
IBM's Sametime solution did not require that third party users have their own account, which was a big win over Skype at the time we reviewed that solution. Additionally we found users were frustrated with GoToMeeting and WebEx (the two big names at the time) because plugins …
Breakout rooms are a very good feature that should be added to the platform. Google Meet ranks above Teams on the web, as it's pretty lightweight; Teams tries to do so much, making it very slow or unstable when just using the web version. Teams is superior to Zoom when it comes …
Microsoft Teams offers a much more integrated experience between their chat and video call function compared to Google Chat and Slack. Both other tools are much better for internal communications are they have simpler UI without other features. Whereas Microsoft Teams can be …
Seamless integration with different files saved on OneDrive that are automatically compatible with Microsoft Teams. Ability to create different types of groups with different security levels allowing to keep the company data secured and project an organized system and processes …
We use both Slack and Teams. We use Slack for most internal meetings and chats. We only use Teams because our larger company requires it, and many of our external customers already have it installed. If we could get customers to use Slack, we would drop Teams in a heartbeat. If …
Personally, I believe that Microsoft Teams stands tall against all of its competitors. What I value most that it brings ahead of its competitors is its options for customization; the modern look and feel of its user interface; the security that it exemplifies; and its …
I love slack and the functionality it has! However, it lets itself down that you can't have client meetings through it / need to use another app like google meet for the meetings. It just is more apps/logins needed for employees = time that could be used doing other things.
I think Teams is closest to Slack but much more ubiquitous and also much more user friendly. I do think products like Webex and Zoom seem to have a little more preference for large scale meetings and it's based mostly on reliability and usability. In addition, Teams tie it …
The advantage of using Microsoft Teams over Zoom is that Teams seamlessly works with Outlook Calendar, Outlook Email, Lists, Forms, etc. If I create a Zoom meeting, I will have to do twice as much work. Working at a Microsoft 365 organization, it is more convenient to use a …
Microsoft Teams is Microsoft's modern replacement for Skype for Business, offering significantly enhanced, integrated collaboration beyond Skype's core chat and calling with deep integration into the Microsoft 365 suite, persistent chat channels, advanced meeting features (like …
The two products are similar. Zoom has its place in the workplace. It is different from Microsoft Teams. It is more useful for personal use in our environment. Most outside organizations and individuals will have the capability to obtain the product and connect with an entity …
Zoom was the first virtual web program I used, and I still use it for some parts of my job, but I like how chat is included with Teams. Our whole department isn't in the same building, so it is convenient to send a message instead of picking up the phone or even just sending an …
UI is so much smooth to use. As we have to use this collaboration tool daily for connecting with team members Microsoft Teams give mor smooth experience. Everything is categorized on different tab, chat, teams, calander, calls. We can easily navigate through out the …
Microsoft Teams is better than both Zoom and Google Meets to me. It seems to have the functionality of both these platforms and also that of Slack for internal messaging. It's more of a "one-stop-shop" for both these needs which makes it a handy piece of software for use in the …
In the past, I would have happily recommended this for small business use cases. Due to its affordability, versatility, and low barrier to entry as well as its simplicity to use. Google Voice was integrated into the Chrome Browser, it was easily accessed from Gmail, and integrated into Gmail and could even be leveraged in such a way to when phone numbers were clicked on, Google Voice was the tool used. However over the past few years and more, in the past couple of years from 2021 to current, this tool seems to have lost favor with the Alphabet suite of tools. With the lack of integrations, it's becoming less stable, and people are just opting more for Google Meet Voice. The biggest area where this is less appropriate and where opportunity has opened for others is its lack of features, like virtual attendants, call recording, call transcription, SMS, MMS, CRM integration, and other key features even 1 or 2 person business really needs in this day and age
Overall, Sametime is a great feature for global teams to communicate, since you can chat quickly and efficiently with Sametime. Also, the file transfer is really fast and it downloads to any folder you choose. The chat history is easy to use and it is easy to find keywords. The feature of creating "emoticons" sometimes can jeopardize the team's efficiency.
It's amazing as a daily driver for team communication, and document search/store. Also, if you're doing a lot of LONG meetings and have trouble remembering details, the AI summarization is amazing and convenient. It just works. I'm not saying I always do this, of course, but if I need to 'skim' instead of really digging into every detail from a meeting, the AI-generated summary is generally good enough that I can get away with it.
The license cost is comparatively low so almost all staff have it installed in our company. We can use it to contact all internal staff.
It’s light and fast with almost no downtime. It also provides easy to use APIs for the user to build automation process on it. We have an internally built robot running on Sametime to answer frequently asked questions and do some repetitive tasks.
Chat history can be saved as per user’s preference and it is easy to be searched.
It can be tricky to configure exactly how you want it. If you are particular about which voicemail greeting goes to which number, and how it appears when it rings through to the phone - it can take a good amount of work to set it up properly.
The mobile app is not that great for anything outside of straight up messaging.
We tried video chatting within Sametime without any real success. There were connection issues and the app would crash quite often. We switched to another product and had no problems.
IBM Sametime just looks outdated. The menus and contact list are not up to date from a UX perspective compared to many other popular chat apps.
The webinars feature has some missing functionally such as the ability for all users to use the Q&A feature (only those with a Microsoft Teams account can use it now), the ability to upload documents for attendees to easily access and download, and the ability for presenters and organizers to easily chat amongst themselves throughout the webinar.
The "Channels" organization hierarchy could be more clear. If you have several channels set up, it can get clunky and hard to find the specific channel you are looking for.
The MS Planner tool lacks functionality and organization. You cannot assign more than one person to a task and it's confusing when you try to share tasks with people - it would be nice if they were automatically added to someone's calendar.
It's user friendly, how to use it is self explanatory, they support all their own options while someone like Phone Booth uses a third party. I can cancel Google Voice anytime and I choose how much I spend with Google Voice
Sametime is now an embedded experience for our users. They know it, they like it, they use it, and they expect it to be wherever they are. Because it is pretty easy to use and NEVER goes down, users know they can rely on it and won't be frustrated by it. Sametime is right up with there with Microsoft Office in terms of user adoption and appreciation.
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
I think it works really well in the arena it operates in, but not so well in areas where an enterprise system would be more appropriate. It's great for quick solutions that just work, but not so much for more complex call management tasks.
Just about everything works the way you expect it would and it's relatively easy for users to figure out. Sametime was one of those things that we started with only a few people as a "test" and before the test period was done we discovered a few hundred people had figured out how to log in and most got it working all on their own. Many of our users want to use Sametime and do so regularly; we do not have to create policies enforcing its usage. Users find it practical to use Sametime to do things like chat, transfer files, share their screen, and so forth.
I find that the chat function itself is quite clean, but once you incorporate the rest of the UI it becomes quite clunky. It feels as though there's too many features in one place, and that leads to it becoming convoluted and a little bit tedious to use. Due to that notifications can get missed which can lead to some tricky situations when working. I do find that it is easy to pick up though and help is readily available with a good support centre.
Typically if Sametime is not available, it's because Windows Updates were done on the servers and they were not rebooted. However, that's not a problem with Sametime -- in fact, if you have Linux you could probably run Sametime for years without any hiccups whatsoever. We have no internal Linux expertise.
Generally very good. Occasionally AV or screen-sharing will stutter and every now and then I hear of it dropping out altogether, but in all cases it was easy to re-establish
They do not offer support unless you have the Business account for Google Voice under G Suite. This is tough, because Google doesn't really have a customer support team for this service, so when it gets shut down for a few hours, we have no choice but to wait it out. But this doesn't happen that often, which is great.
I have to use support for many customers. However, support is generally quite responsive and continues to see an issue through to resolution and I would recommend using their knowledgeable and well-trained staff.
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.
It is a pretty seamless program to transfer to, even for people who either have little experience with these programs or people who were stuck on Skype
Google Voice operates in a narrow niche compared to other high-volume call products, such as Gong and Outreach. Google Voice would be much better, structured for small teams with limited calling, less structure, and fewer call scripts. For instance, this would better serve a support motion, where you provide a phone number for customers to call, so you have some level of routing and an end destination. If you were also expecting constant change in the personnel who have assigned numbers, it is easy to provision and remove numbers, but you might lose continuity with some of the phone numbers being allocated.
Text chat is text chat. It's not a technically hard problem to solve. It's when you try and move out of text chat into more fully featured applications that allow for audio or video calling, transcripts, etc, it becomes apparent that the developers on Sametime gave up a long time ago. In my organization, Slack has nearly completely replaced Sametime for any and all purposes that Sametime used to fulfill.
Breakout rooms are a very good feature that should be added to the platform. Google Meet ranks above Teams on the web, as it's pretty lightweight; Teams tries to do so much, making it very slow or unstable when just using the web version. Teams is superior to Zoom when it comes to chat and integration with other platforms.
Sametime is rock solid. It runs on WebSphere, DB2 and other related IBM technologies. This does mean the back-end is highly complex and very difficult to learn and get comfortable with, however.