We performed a comparison between Cisco Meeting Server and Skype for Business based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Virtual Meetings solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The UI is user-friendly and very good overall."
"You can use the Cisco Meeting Server to set up conference calls and virtual meetings. Those are the two primary functions of Meeting Server. Most people in the company are using Microsoft Teams, so we only use Meeting Server when we have an internal meeting for all staff."
"What I like most about Cisco Meeting Server is its quick management. The solution also has a straightforward configuration."
"The share screen option available during conferences is one of the best features of Cisco Meeting Server."
"Cisco Meeting Server is an easy and less complex solution."
"There are free versions of the solution available."
"The quality of the meetings is very good."
"It saves trouble, and it saves us time."
"We like the easy provisioning of Skype for Business Conferencing."
"I use the chat feature to communicate with my staff, which is very helpful."
"We chose Skype for Business after other colleagues suggested that we give it a try. It has served us well."
"The simplicity and ease of use are the most valuable features. It's so much easier and quicker than writing an email to someone and waiting for them to read it."
"I like the seamless integration to local telecommunications."
"A few features are missing on the Meetings app, like a recording function. My understanding is that you need to buy a separate recording solution. It's modular, so you have to enable some functions if you want to use them. For example, we had to enable the Mood function. Recording is the primary feature we'd like to see in the app."
"What would make Cisco Meeting Server better is integrating it with Zoom and Teams so that you can connect or make a call through any of the two third-party solutions."
"This is a difficult solution to install and it should be made easier."
"Cisco Meeting Server should include a feature to control another user's screen during a remote session."
"In Cisco Meeting Server, GUI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The inability to integrate Skype with other products is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I venture to say that 30% of the people using this solution at our company have had issues with stability, due to the volatility and crashes."
"We need a feature where you can virtually raise your hand to silently let the presenter know that you have a question."
"If one of the users has a poor internet connection, this failure will compromise the meeting, causing delays and distortions in the communications."
"I don't recall coming across any big missing features."
"I would like to see an updated user interface and layout even though no functionality is missing."
"Lacks a zoom-in feature for whoever is presenting."
"The solution lacks to provide reporting functionality, and I would like to see the solution provide that feature."
Cisco Meeting Server is ranked 8th in Virtual Meetings with 5 reviews while Skype for Business is ranked 4th in Virtual Meetings with 59 reviews. Cisco Meeting Server is rated 8.4, while Skype for Business is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Meeting Server writes "A scalable tool useful to hold conferences and video meetings". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Skype for Business writes "Reliable, useful for remote work, and great but isn't as robust as Microsoft Teams". Cisco Meeting Server is most compared with Webex, Pexip, Zoom, Cisco TelePresence and Polycom RealPresence Clariti, whereas Skype for Business is most compared with Webex, Zoom, TeamViewer, GoToMeeting and HCL Connections. See our Cisco Meeting Server vs. Skype for Business report.
See our list of best Virtual Meetings vendors.
We monitor all Virtual Meetings reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.