4 ms·
They kind of charge for Teams already, at least for some customers/users. In order to have a teleconference dial-in number, the user that created the conference
by bladegash 6y ago
They kind of charge for Teams already, at least for some customers/users. In order to have a teleconference dial-in number, the user that created the conference has to have a license (I believe it’s somewhere around $10 p/mo). In my company, this is more or less a fundamental requirement if you interact in a customer facing role.
Word and Excel integration is one thing. In my opinion, the integration with Outlook is the bigger selling point. I want to schedule a teams meeting with a customer? Create a calendar invitation and click a button to make it a Teams meeting. Dial-in information is then automatically placed in the invitation. That same meeting (and the rest of mg Outlook calendar) is also now synced with my calendar in Teams, so now I receive alerts in Teams when someone starts the meeting, the meeting start time, etc.
Other services have integration with Outlook, but nothing like what Teams has, and to go against the grain a bit, that aspect of Teams’ UX is fantastic.
I think one thing many are missing is a lot of new Teams users aren’t using it for the Slack-like features (e.g., channels). Most of the people I’ve worked with on teams over the last 6 months use it solely for direct messaging, file sharing, direct phone calls to coworkers, internal meetings, teleconferencing, etc. for those purposes, Teams’ UX is more than adequate and I actually prefer it over Slack.
That is not to say it’s perfect though (dear Microsoft: please make changing input/output device settings more intuitive and well-behaved...).
- tjayy 6y agoZoom has most of this as well, one click creating meeting in calendar invite with all your dial in information Outlook reminders will say click to join zoom meeting. And the zoom client will have a list of your upcoming meetings
- bladegash 6y agoFair point, but I have used Zoom and GoToMeeting’s integrations with Outlook and there may be some similar (or identical) features, but the experience with Teams is a far more integrated experience in Outlook. Further, why leave the Microsoft O365 ecosystem if you’re already using it? Teams offers other capabilities and integrations that Zoom doesn’t have and the Teams integration does not require additional user action to add to Outlook (it’s there by default). Other value adds for enterprises include centralized identity/license/user management via the existing O365 admin portal/Azure AD, singular invoicing, consistent SLA with single vendor, etc. I haven’t looked into Zoom’s SSO integrations with things like AD or Azure AD, but again, that’s another example of resistance for enterprise customers/system administrators.
- andor 6y agoFair point, but I have used Zoom and GoToMeeting’s integrations with Outlook and there may be some similar (or identical) features, but the experience with Teams is a far more integrated experience in Outlook. As far as I understand, it is Microsoft who are putting third parties at an unfair disadvantage by not offering them the same level of integration.
- bladegash 6y agoI don’t disagree with you and other companies do the same thing to Microsoft. Just saying it’s reality at this point in time and at least for now, offers an advantage for Teams.