This comes up all the time, to the point where I think people are running different versions of Teams. I would be interested in exploring that angle tbh-
For me:
* The client is "heavy" when compared to contemporaries
* Web version only works with Chrome. Firefox, Qutebrowser, Safari have severe limitations.
* Notifications are absent or overly-verbose
* UI design leaves a lot to be desired, things are all over the place, finding thins is hard.
* New UI refresh is "top heavy"; lots of elements in the top bar which makes people appear to be looking down on their screen for no reason. This is the only video conferencing program to do this.
* Video quality is very low compared to contemporaries.
* Screen Sharing lacks basic features too
* Whiteboards are some kind of extra application which has to be enabled
* Having external people invited still requires you to manually allow them into the room (unlike Google Meet)
* "Teams" are linked to Sharepoint and will cause Chaos with Onedrive and Sharepoint if you don't remember certain things: like uploading something to a channel will drop it in a weird folder with open permissions, or that "private teams" make brand new sharepoint sites: your org probably has hundreds of these.
* The Client randomly hangs on my machine (freeze, blocking all incoming and outgoing audio/video)
* the latency in audio is at least 3-5x higher than contemporaries
* when attempting to launch a meeting in a hurry, it's almost as if teams knows and spends 30s loading. I suspect there is some "Join now" function for a meeting in progress that is actually causing an adverse affect here as I've been able to repeatedly measure this problem.
I suspect that some of these issues are because I'm in Europe and the servers are hosted in the US. It could also be because I use Linux and MacOS.
I often also find that _people who like Teams_, have only really used other Microsoft collaboration tools in a professional setting. (Or worse ones that are known to be worse like AT&T Connect.)
> I personally find it the best conferencing tool for recurring cadence
"Best" is so insanely subjective that it's difficult to answer this.
Audio/Video Quality and ergonomics are better with Google Meet: but Jitsi works absolutely fine on recurring meetings: you just put the link in the meeting request.
Uses a lot of memory and is slow
Frequently crashes my machine
The UI for discussions I find poor. No one uses the "teams" concept and everything is done in private chats.
The audio in conferencing also renders it unusable.
Yes, the thing that consumes more resources uses more resources. Because it can do more things. People are also mad about that btw.
Saying "well, x uses more than y" where `y` in this case is using about 5x more resources than its contemporaries is just an insultingly weak argument.
I find that hard to believe.
mIRC used to use ~2MiB when I had 256MiB in 2003 and I was in a lot of channels.
I know this because I used to count every megabyte of usage back then and MSN Messenger with the "animated images" was the real hog back then.
With everything else that runs, you're out of RAM pretty quick: Our production software takes around 1 GB when running, Firefox/Chrome with a few tabs, Acrobat Pro...
I'm lucky that I've received an upgrade to 16 GB because I need special software for my work. For the next system I'll ask for 32 GB and 16 GB for my teams. Don't understand why the corporate IT is so sparse with RAM...
520/8192 = 0.0635
[1] https://learn.microsoft.com/en-gb/sysinternals/downloads/pro...
What does this mean?
Apparently it's corpo/PM speak [0] for meeting #'s, which judging by his stance on the poorly reviewed Teams app so far makes me think that MS product market fit strategy worked in this case: it knows who it built Teams for.
Just look at who this is aimed at:
> Where the Action Is is a book for leaders seeking to make sense of their meetings and master their business.
0: https://www.lucidmeetings.com/meeting-types/team-cadence-mee...
Ha!
Even though I know this was addressed to me, you clearly opened the floodgate on the very vocal customer complaints section on HN that has clearly struck a nerve with many more than you anticipated chiming in.
With that said, yes it's full bloat and sounds like utter crap even with audio only on every time I've ever used it; I typically use Signal and only revert to conventional apps for work purposes and it always struggles worse than the other.