That is all
17 replies (most recent on top)
Webex video conferencing and webex chat are not the same thing.
Webex video conferencing is fine, slightly ugly and difficult to use but its the same as any other one imo. I'd even go as far to say it has (or at least did in the past) have better features than rest of the market.
Webex chat is garbage. Theres a reason Meraki and Splunk still use Slack. It does not work.
You can say this company or that company use webex so it is a great product, but which of them also use Slack?
That's not truth. There are many companies across the globe that are using Webex. I know, because I work on it. In addition, we are opening new DCs in various locations in the World. Cisco and US Government are not the only users, believe me.
Quality or functionality of the product can be a subject of debate, sure, but to say nobody's using it outside Cisco is simply not truth.
@wk I would add that the product team has a habit of moving things around or changing or removing functionality without notice and it’s incredibly annoying. One such feature which was disabled in the mainline product was to turn off video from participants by a standard participant. It’s also not uncommon that menu items are shifted around which makes it difficult to make changes.
### not employed by, or compensated by any of the the companies listed below
@w2+1ky9cmpk5 you are both correct, and incorrect.
ms teams is garbage and msft will be forced to subscription costs. nothing is truly free from msft. there is always a baked in, or future cost. the only redeeming feature of teams is the ability to transcribe meetings with ai. the competitors can also do that. why would an enterprise want to adopt teams chat when most companies use slack which provides more features & capabilities?
beside seamless integration with ms products and meeting transcribing, what more value does teams offer?
webex works, but the ui is terrible. and the app itself has experienced more issues on my experience than zoom or teams.
zoom seems to be the winner for convenience and features. fyi zoom was founded by former members of the cisco webex team. their product was so unpopular, people were inspired to leave cisco and build their own company to compete in the video conferencing space. typical cisco, good engineers and product leaders leave because they become burned out from the cisco bureaucratic bs, then start their own companies who become competitors.
it would be funny if cisco eventually acquired zoom and abandoned webex altogether. strange things happen in tech, you never know.
Have you ever used Teams - it garbage and the video quality is terrible. MSFT gave it away for free when COVID happened. More companies see that Teams isn't great - but the cost of change is big - all those chat and spaces, and staff training.
All the Federal Gov and secure meetings are on Webex for a reason....
John at the Yoga class uses MS Tems
@OP Facts.
apple uses webex.
In the enterprise space Microsoft gives away teams as part of their larger EA's. When the company gets the bill for their actual calling usage it becomes a huge issue but by then they are too engrained to rip it out.
Webex is a better product but we got out maneuvered by Microsoft in theie approach to enterprise customers.
@OP truth nuke
Truth. Microsoft and zoom have finished eating Cisco’s lunch. It’s over.
Cisco should just close the Webex business and start using Zoom. It will be much cheaper.
@c1 That’s interesting. I was a big fan of Duo until they agreed to the Cisco acquisition. Now I actively tell people in the tech community to avoid it. Word of mouth is a powerful tool.
Duo literally makes $700M a year.
The leadership did not believe that it was a strategic problem, so they began to use AI to analyze everyone's Jira and work data, trying to find a scapegoat.
TBH I was surprised to find out some actually do use it.
Do you trust a chef that doesn't eat their own food?
or DUO, ASA, SDA, SDWAN, etc.