Skype for Business was an online messaging and conferencing tool, now superseded by Microsoft Teams.
N/A
Sococo
Score 1.0 out of 10
N/A
Sococo is a remote collaboration tool with integrations with third-party applications such as Google Docs, Atlassian JIRA, and Box.
$14.99
per month per seat
Pricing
Skype for Business, now part of Microsoft Teams
Sococo
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Sococo
$14.99 or $13.99 if paid annually
per month per seat
Sococo Unlimited
$24.99
per month per seat
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Skype for Business, now part of Microsoft Teams
Sococo
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Sococo pricing plan includes a 10 seat minimum and 500 minutes per seat per month. Additional minutes price at $5 per 1,000 minutes. Sococo unlimited include a 100 seat minimum with unlimited minutes per seat per user.
Chose Skype for Business, now part of Microsoft Teams
Skype for Business is great for arranging interactive sessions with group members. It has great audio and video quality and live chat enable others to communicate with each other personally or as a group during any session. File sharing is also easy. It is best for its quality …
WebEx Meetings, Skype for Business, and Google Hangouts all require that you create some sort of "call event" that people can join or leave. Sococo gives you the ability to seamlessly move between meetings within one app and also provide a status of available or unavailable, or …
Sococo lacks the power of Slack for storing and searching old messages but I think Dlack is overkill in most situations. When using instant messages ad an alternative to a quick phone call who needs a record?
Skype for Business is just awful for conference calls. You can't …
I prefer Sococo over Lync/Skype for a few reasons. I feel the user interface is slicker, better voice clarity, easier to hop between calls. And, all call members can go to a common chat room on their own accord instead of one person trying to invite everybody. I also feel that …
Skype is useful for collaborations across distances, including work from home, as well as a more convenient way to communicate with a large group of people. Skype is also useful to communicate with specific parties quickly, rather than relying on cellular service in areas where not as available. Skype is less useful if the team does not use computers , tablets, smartphones, etc in daily workflow as it would rarely be used.
We tried Sococo as means of gamifying a natively remote office. It does the job but the tool suffers from a lack of integrations. You will run out of free minutes very quickly and the additional charges are too high to make business sense.
Instant messaging to anyone who we know only by name/email. Even if they're offline, they get the message in missed convos and a notification automatically goes to them via Outlook mail. All conversations are saved and accessible via Outlook.
Video and voice calls are a norm in the WFH scenario, and an average employee has around 4-5 calls a day. Skype gives notifications for upcoming meetings, allows easy scheduling via outlook calendar, and its audio/video quality [is] reasonably good compared to the amount of data it consumes.
Status availabilities - in the WFH scenario, you could be off for lunch, out of office, busy, sharing screens - and might not want to be disturbed. Skype allows you to do that, and in case you're off, ensures that you know that you have missed messages.
Screen sharing - we have to share screens at least once or twice a day with a coworker when working on some issues/features, and Skype easily lets us do that. One of the best things about Skype is that the screen can be shared without being on a video/voice call - which is of immense advantage because oftentimes, you could prefer sharing the screen, while it [is] too noisy to talk.
Visual layout - the virtual office visible was very helpful because it made the organization feel closer and as a whole, much more connected. Further, you can group departments in your layout, so it gave a good visual understanding of who was part of each 'department/team.'
Sound - the sound quality was good overall in meetings, and I liked the realistic sounds for opening and closing an office, etc. It allowed for a real office feel, and this is especially important since a lot of companies offer the option to work from home now - this removes the 'disconnect' that usually exists when working from home.
Communication options - it allowed for multiple ways to communicate and places to communicate - i.e., in the auditorium, lunchroom, conference room, or a smaller room. Very realistic and a variety in that sense.
Probably the biggest area is the video element as it has historically struggled in this area.
The need to be forced to federate with another organisation by providing yours and enabling the other organisation settings is a bit tedious but once done, allows for simple collaboration between third-parties.
Functionality wise, as it's an older product and being superseded by MS Teams, it feels as if it's run its course but was very good for what it does/did at the time.
The software is simple to install and configure. It is rather simple to explain for correct use. It is possible to profile users for the different functions offered. It is integrated quite completely with Outlook and with Active Directory security. It performs all communication functions well with one or more interlocutors and the possibility of granting control of your computer is convenient.
Very easy to use. Even though Microsoft Teams has a lot of features and integrations, as a user I feel completely comfortable on finding what I need, getting information about the app extensions and using them. It's a very comprehensive tool, intuitive design and does not make me feel tired to be using it. I am glad with the current experience.
I have only had to reach out to the Support team at Skype for Business once with an issue, and I was pleasantly surprised and encouraged by the quickness and thoroughness of their response. The wait time was short and my question was dealt with politely and clearly, so I would say the support team has it together.
Sococo didn't seem to have a strong support line. In comparison to other products, such as Microsoft Teams, it did not regularly check in with us. There should be opportunities to give feedback on the quality of the program periodically and if we had any issues. Sometimes, Sococo would crash, and we would 'restart it' but not know why it happened.
Skpe for business is utilized company wide in regards to my company. Everyone not only uses it, but uses it often. It is an effective way of communicating. It also integrates very nicely with outlook and all conversation history is pushed to a folder within the outlook system. We also have it so that if someone misses a message, they are sent an email reminder saying that there is a message that went unread.
For the below reason I will always choose this app over its competitors: Better audio and video quality, Little to no disconnections or freezing when on a call/video conference Integrates well with mailbox/ calendar/ one drive, and SharePoint is easy to use
I prefer Sococo over Lync/Skype for a few reasons. I feel the user interface is slicker, better voice clarity, easier to hop between calls. And, all call members can go to a common chat room on their own accord instead of one person trying to invite everybody. I also feel that it's easier to share one's screen and swap between different shared screens with Sococo.
We almost lost our biggest client because of the poor performance early on in our implementation...the online meetings were poor quality for audio and bandwidth refreshing
Many of the employees in our company disliked the quality so much, they started to sign up for free Cisco WebEx accounts to use instead
The majority of employees in our company lost trust in our CTO because of his decision to switch from Cisco WebEx to Skype for Business
Morning meetings are much simpler with sococo than without. Small powwows with coworkers to work out little bugs are also a lot more enticing since setup is essentially nonexistent.
It might be argued that the cost of sococo isn't worth the benefits of simplicity and ease of use.
