We migrated to O365 in general this past year, and SFB was part of that solution. It's been a vast improvement over our previous collab solution.
We're already using Teams internally to IT as sort of a familiarity exercise/POC, and thus far it's worked well. I'm not sure how the garden-variety business user will fare, but what we found with SFB that high-frequency users got accustomed pretty quickly. We drafted some good instructional docs that we believe helped smooth that process.
Yes, we are doing this, but it seems (to me as a user), that Skype is easier to use than Teams. I have only been using Teams for a few months. FWIW, I have been able to embed SmartSheets, OneNote into it. And we have done some Meeting via Teams. Meetings still seem better to me in Skype. I will have to pay more attention the next time I am in a Teams meeting.
BTW, this would have been a good question to ask in a Poll, so we could get 5 points instead of 1 for replying, LOL.
We were looking at going from Lync to Skype because it is the "next" thing, but Skype has some issues with various OS and Office versions we have deployed. It also kills the older chat clients, leaving people cut off if you can't complete the rollout all at once. If we go Teams we get the brand new experience (for better or worse) but can leave the old chat client there for people to use during the rollout. It is Teams for the whole company, and in a smaller scale IT has Slack in case the Microsoft stack fails.
From what I've read too Microsoft Teams is a very different product, although both fulfill some of the same requirements. We've had issues with Skype at some sites. Some was tied to misconfigured virtual firepower sensors which didn't have enough memory or cpu and adjustments helped there.
We have moved our lync over to sfb and getting good call quality in some areas has been a real @#$% to figure out. Using some newer netflow tools has helped to get the QOS under control but this sfb isn't all it was cracked up to be and I'm not sure it's really 100% anywhere at all but it is what we have now. Everyone thought this would save us money going this route but it's often worse than what we had before. I hope the new stuff is better than this... that's all I can say. Basically anything might be better than sfb.
That's too bad. Internal Skype has worked well for us, and we only occasionally ran into issues with SFB when using it across the Internet with other Skype customers--usually when trying to share screens.
It's gotten better, but still, anytime you've got something that wants QoS across the Internet to work well, it's a rotten design.
Skype for IM is fine and actually works pretty well in some cases.
Skype for VoIP is abysmal.
We have switched from Cisco, to Shortel, and now Skype/Lync, and I have to say, the last is the worst by far.
Interesting. Our Skype voice is reliable. Occasionally I'll see an individual workstation or headset that's problematic, one which consistently works OK for 30 minutes then drops. I haven't found the cause, but it may be associated with a specific model/version of PC or headset.
My PC & headset work well, and have since Day One. Better than Skype has.
Maybe I got the wrong impression of Teams, but I found it to be the „EOC“ for Skype, SharePoint, OneNote, Exchange. We use it to bring all the information from these tools together. However we still use Skype etc. as stand-alone
Our MS rep told us this month that Skype is being replaced by Team. I'll be interested to see what the final product environment looks like.
Having used EOC, it wasn't the solution my organization needed, but I can see where it is appropriate for other organizations.
I realize you targeted another Thwackster, but thought you might like knowing my organization uses screen sharing very frequently. I use it about a dozen times any given day during meetings. It works perfectly for me internally. Getting it going between our internal clients and other businesses' clients across the Internet sometimes is a little flaky, but MS and our VAR have been helpful getting the kinks worked out. Often the issue is new ports or poorly-documented functionality requirements, resulting in changes needing to be made to our servers or firewalls.
We've not found anything we haven't been able to work out yet, but it took years to get to this state. I REALLY don't like the Internet/DMZ/Internal server/firewall rules required for the resilience and functionality we need. They are the most complex solutions I've ever implemented, and it's hard not to think they weren't kluged together without a great plan and top-notch design overview for efficiency.
Here's praying that Team will be easier to deploy and more reliable.
We use it not on a daily but weekly basis. We have a few clients that use it as well so we can keep in touch very quickly and maybe get some issues resoved over screen sharing. Video-Conferencing....not too often.
We just implemented Skype.... I was a LYNC user in a previous life....
not terribly impressed with Skype. I suspect we will be doing Team shortly as well because of Skype's "issues".... (much sooner than later ..)
2018 will be anything but boring in my world!
Same boat for us. We have limited deployment of Lync/Skype but have it on the radar to upgrade to Team sometime after April. Looking to see what people describe about their experiences.
In the same boat we had silly license issues so became useless then half of the company couldn’t use it externaly.
We have just got team but didnt realise it replaced lync thought it was just another tool.
used it for a bit but just seemed to hit barriers with it so not used it since.
antbody fancy trying to sell it to me as dont see any benefits
also will solarwinds do anything out of the box to monitor it?