Forum Discussion
Modern Team Sites vs. Communication Sites--is there really a difference?
- There are a few under the covers things that I have found are different (but those are minor so far).
The main things I've found are:
1) Comm Site default pages have a full width web part zone (modern team sites dont)
2) Comm Site uses left navigation on top and has no "top navigation"
3) Team sites have left navigation, if you want to hide them you have to do it with some CSS
Other than that, I've technically been able to make Team sites look and act like comm sites, in most respects with a little CSS hackery. Like Andrew mentioned though, we are completely rethinking how we have done everything because of the new modern world, and we are having to do ALOT of mini-migrations from one site to another to make things make the most sense.
from Ignite, at the end of https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Ignite/Microsoft-Ignite-Orlando-2017/THR2036session in the Q&A they answer this question. The presenter Dave Cohen from the team delivering Comms sites says 'a resource for your whole company where a few contributors publishing information to your whole company to read.... very different to the permission basis for team sites'.
This very much confirms the distinction between the two types and how to select the right one.
One way to help you decide is to have a look at the mobile experience. Currently, the Communication sites are a very nice interface for users, while team sites are pretty ordinary looking, present content as activity, files and lists, and are more 'functional'.
As we migrate our sites to SharePoint Online it's one of the first things I raise - let's have a look on a mobile device. For purely informative sites, the mobile experience is better in Comms sites. For functional, document/list based sites, the mobile experience is more practical in team sites.