Comment on Zoom vs Teams

Hi all,

I work in an international organization in Europe, about 10k people, established in several countries.

In the course of the job, we have hearings with external parties. In some complicated cases, it involves translators, multiple experts, attorneys, a commission of several people, etc.

We use to have Skype, but are migrating to Teams, because it is bundled in MS software.

However, when we have complex cases as described above, we have to use Zoom, because as one colleague told me, Zoom allows to handle complex situations (e.g. multiple people with different functions/roles and distributed into channels) that Teams cannot. In other words, Zoom software is more capable than Teams. He did say however, that the Zoom setup in these complex cases was a pain (distributing the roles etc.)

More than this I cannot say, as I am not yet involved in those cases (but soon will be). I did not want to turn our professional conversation toward a Zoom software conversation, but I am telling you what I learned.

(My organisation is also in talks to generalize Zoom usage, but this is still hypothetical so I won’t explain here. It is however a sign of the times, as we have Teams after all.)

One final note: as a Teams user, I am not really impressed. Video is sometimes a bit blurry, the background mode is slightly buggy (which then looks like bad special effects from the '80s), the sound is not perfect. But 1) that may be due to our network and 2) I haven’t used Zoom, so I can’t tell if it is better in the same situations.

Hope this is informational.

Sedi- Long ZM (34%, too much I know, but I let it run from down there below…)


In comparing Zoom and Teams, it is important to keep in mind that both products have a variety of features which may or may not be available to you if you are using the software in an enterprise environment. My employer provides us with Teams, but the version we have available on our computers does not have all of the features enabled. I’m not a huge fan of Teams, but that is due in part to the fact that it isn’t as feature-rich or functional as the version of Zoom I run on my personal computer. I don’t have any real way to do a head-to-head comparison of the full-feature versions, but I will say that I find Teams to typically have lower video and sound quality and to have meetings crash badly more often that Zoom. Full disclosure: I own shares of Zoom, having bought because I was impressed with the product.



I am an IT consultant and work on multiple client projects at any given time. Our distributed teams from around the world have to use client’s communication/collab platforms.
So over the last several years I have used Hangouts/Meet, Webex, Zoom, Goto Meeting, Skype, Vidyo, HipChat….I am sure theres a couple of others missing.

When WFH took off earlier this year and people started pumping up ZM, I didn’t get it. Coz Zoom product performance was one of the worst I have dealt with - dropped calls, software hanging, video quality issues, etc. G-Meet video and audio quality was way ahead in March. I felt ZM won’t go anywhere….GOOG, MSFT, CSCO are so entrenched in companies and offer superior performance…

Fast forward to now…Zoom performance is much improved, they have introduced so many new features and are constantly expanding footprint.
Zoom saw the pivot to WFH and quickly capitalized on it.
What differentiates them is that they are HUNGRY & NIMBLE in a way that Goliaths like MSFT cannot. As they say - it takes 25 miles to turn a battleship.

I don’t own ZM stock….

  • F8

It is interesting how much our professional experiences differ. For us Zoom has been the best for years but we didn’t have a strong enough business case to migrate away from another solution until the pandemic when the installed room equipment no longer mattered as much as ease of use and reliability of communication between team members. We put Zoom up against several other solutions and Zoom was by far the best for quality, ease of use and cross-platform needs. This was back in March. If anything I’ve been concerned that some quality may be sacrificed for the additions made since then to make it harder for users to mess up on the security side (the “security issues” were mostly user error or configuration issues) and I view the encryption work done for 5.0 as improvements (except some of the annoying default changes like turning the waiting room on).

I had to use Meet again the other day and there are so many annoying little design flaws or missing features I’ve grown used to. For example when someone was presenting and I was using the mute hot key it would bring up the bottom bar over the row faces of the other participants. No way to reconfigure or rearrange elements. No second monitor split for presentation. No backgrounds to hide my real background. Etc…


After posting it bothered me that my post felt like yet another anecdotal tech comparison, or worse, evangelical praise. It was just a share but in retrospect added nothing really.

One of the reasons many of us love the way we invest here is because we do NOT have to know many aspects of the tech compares to competitors since the business performance is proof enough the customers like it. Specifically the DBNRR and DBNER (expansion and retention rates, respectively).

I’m not saying that understanding aspects of the tech is not important. It is IS important to understanding optionality, factors that affect margin or sales, growth opportunities, and so on. I’m just saying we took this thread in a direction that distracts. Proof of quality and adoption is in the performance pudding (gross, sorry).

Zoom is performing the way it is because it is a vey good product/tool/platform. If it wasn’t it wouldn’t be where it is today. These other solutions were bigger, earlier, and aren’t where Zoom is today, nor will they magically be where it is going tomorrow. The (not first but still) mover advantage has been won. Period.


Many Thanks F8!

Really appreciate and love to hear “first hand, frontline knowledge” about a product or company like you shared here.


Who does own a part of ZM
company and would enjoy hearing such first hand knowledge in all the companies I’ve invested.

I am an educator in Asia and have been teaching remotely from the USA until borders open so that I can return to my school.

Our school offers both Teams and Zoom. The near unanimous consensus is that Teams video meetings are of unacceptable and of an unreliable quality. Once screen sharing and slide show presentations enter the equation, Teams isn’t as seamless. The video quality of Teams always leaves a lot to be desired against Zoom. As a teacher, I need to be able to see real time facial expressions in my students. Teachers are pushing the software to the limits and Zoom works. With Zoom, I have been able to present films to my students from my remote computer.

After I remote teach 6-7 hours a day to classes on Zoom, I am disappointed when I return to WhatsApp video chat and Apple FaceTime to socialize with my long-distance friends and families. Despite the hassle of setting up a room, if I know I will be having an extended chat, I’ll set up a zoom room for chatting with a friend.