Did you hear that from a Microsoft salesperson? Only a person who hasn't used both regularly can say that. UX and features on Zoom are better.
The mere fact that to this day Teams has wildly different features depending on how you join the call is a joke - for instance, joining from a browser on macOS results in no chat (the button simply isn't there).
The Zoom UI is atrocious.
What?! This has to be a glitch or something. How can something so basic be simply missing this long? Teams is not a new product. I just checked. It's 5 years old.
Huddles are okay for internal 1-on-1 meetings, but Teams works well when you need to organise a large meeting (potentially with people outside your org).
On the other hand Teams is awful for chat. Slack has put so much care and thought into messaging that their UX is close to perfect imo.
Most fun thing about Teams is that it works so poorly with different accounts that everybody waits for just that guy that logs in with a non-guest account and let the herd in.
For small teams that aren't too concerned about that it seems fine. Personally my group of a couple dozen friends and I use it for pretty much all of our communication because we don't care much about privacy in that context. But for any company larger than a couple dozen folks it seems like a pretty risky choice compared to Slack/Microsoft/Google/etc.
List of products Microsoft makes:
- [bajillion item list of everything including the kitchen sink]
List of products Slack makes:
- Slack
Microsoft gives Teams away for free and to them it's worthless. They have no incentive to make it great, just good enough that you'll look at the price of Slack, look at the price of Office 365, and say "ehh, we can save some money, Slack can't be that good." Making Teams not suck doesn't move their revenue dial one iota.
(And sure, Slack is owned by Salesforce and they make a bajillion things, but Slack started as its own company that just made one thing, and made it well. They're at least coasting on that laser product focus)
That's not true, I would switch to Office 365 if it didn't suck. Having an entire suite fully integrated and under one license is a great value proposition - but the thing has to work. I've had to use Teams over the years and every time I get the same shitty experience I've had with it 5 years ago when I first tried it.
From what? O365 collaboration is terrible. If you do joint document editing, O365 will drive you nuts after using something GSuite. What many do is have GSuite and then O365 for people who need office products for various reasons.
I can understand Teams being a pain in multi-tenancy setups but even that is something which I've noticed is being improved recently.
> Surely they could afford to revamp this product and reap the rewards of people not hating using their tools?
It's not a business priority. Management is sold on Teams by integration with their existing services, as well as security, compartmentalization, and so on. They're not sold on "this is a polished product that people enjoy using".
And when you look at the spec sheet, Teams is an awesome piece of software. It can replace Zoom, phone calls, Slack, file sharing and collaboration, and so on. It can even replace e-mail to some extent, though if you're working at a company that's mandating Teams there's a good chance that your company has a strong e-mail culture and people are still going to e-mail you all the time for no good reason.
Anyway yeah, Teams is just the worst.
I think the Discord UX is worse but at least the product kinda works.
All they can do is put a bit more lipstick on the pig.
It's almost a meme at this point. In the presence of other clients that have gotten it "right" (or at least more "right" than teams) like Slack, Discord to an extent, and Zoom for video calling, how has Microsoft allowed this festering wound to languish? Surely they could afford to revamp this product and reap the rewards of people not hating using their tools?