Teams Meetings

[Kevin Emerick]

We're using Teams with minimal PSTN services.  In short - peer to peer is the predominate use of Microsoft Teams meetings.  We're noticing that Teams Meetings don't end if the organizer leaves the meeting.  In fact - everyone must leave the meeting for the meeting to end.  This is concerning because we're toying around with Audio Conferencing and shudder to think what the cost will be for meetings where attendees never disconnect.  Looking at the Teams admin portal - there doesn't appear to be a setting or policy that controls the length of time a meeting channel can remain open.  We'd like to put a limit on it on the premise that people will forget to disconnect and leave the call ongoing for an unknown length of time.

Can we expect some sort of control for meeting session length?

[#2]

How are you licensing Audio Conferencing? If its through the add-on cal or E5 then there isn't a per-minute fee at all to worry about.

I think the consequence of a meeting ending when an organiser leaves could be pretty bad, imagine them driving under a bridge and everyone being thrown out of a call ...

[#3]

You can always reconnect to your meeting in chat and boot everyone but it should timeout you would think if you wanted.

[#4]

Thanks Steven .. We're licensing via add-on to our E3.  And, yes, I agree about the consequences; however, I would expect that the meeting would survive its predetermined duration (e.g., if the meeting is an hour long and meeting creator gets disconnected at the 35th minute the meeting should carry on for the additional 25 minutes - at least).  I'm not really lobbying to sever the meeting .. just lobbying to kill the meeting if it is Nth minutes past the expected duration.  Or, simply state that meetings can't last longer than 8 hours (something like that).  

[#5]

Check here, it's clearly answered ...

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/audio-conferencing-common-questions#what-is-the-maxi...

I think a point to note is that thousands of companies use Microsoft's audio conferencing service, it all just works and we don't end with any bill shock.

[#6]

@Steven Collier Licensing & $s aside, one should be able to "End" a meeting they organized. That's available in Skype for Business. Why's it not available in Microsoft Teams?

This is a good illustration of my problems with Teams. Why aren't "all" the useful functions in Skype for Business not fully available in Microsoft Teams?

Another example is that I'm unable to select a Contact in Outlook Desktop App & call that person on the phone using Microsoft Teams. I could offer several more examples! Did none of the relevant Microsoft Teams developers ever use Skype for Business?

[#7]

I'll give you one reason. It's not Skype for Business. These little things will come over time, but they are two different products, there is a whole list of things that Teams can do that Skype for Business wished it could. I personally don't think Microsoft originally intended on replacing Skype for Business with Teams so it's going to take time to migrate most of the used features after the fact that they didn't originally design around. Although they started trying to make people move, you are not forced to move from Skype for Business so if there is something you can't live without then don't move.

It's not perfect, and won't be for awhile, but if you look at Teams today, vs. Teams this time last year or so, the Skype functionality is light-years ahead of where it was. We just have to pluck around the issues or hang onto Skype longer.

[#8]

@Chris Webb At first glance, your reply makes sense. However, when I think about it for a moment, it doesn't. Why then is Microsoft marketing Teams as a replacement for Skype for Business? Why does any web-based attempt to purchase a Skype for Business Calling Plan, etc. take you back to a site stating: "Teams in Office 365 provides business calling for people on a global scale, combining Phone System with Direct Routing and/or Calling Plan."?

But it's cool... I realize it's the "New Normal", i.e. replace a stable product with a "new" product that has incomplete feature-sets & use paying customers as involuntary Beta-testers. Bottom-line: Teams sucks as a Phone System & it shouldn't have been released or marketed as such until it didn't suck as a Phone System!

[#9]

Can't say I disagree to some degree. But for a large number of users it's efficient. But they aren't forcing people over yet. Most of us don't agree with the marketing push and the whole "Teams is on par" jargen that was being pushed at some point. But it's getting there. If they forced everyone to upgrade to it's current state I could see it being a bigger issue, but until then it's just something you got to weigh the pro's and con's and move when it fits your setup.

[#10]

@Donovan Lewis why do you want to end a meeting, what business need is this fulfilling for you? When my previous organisation with 7,000 audio conference users used SfB we never found any particular need. Skype for Business had gained functionality for years, things were only added, there were lots of features that were rarely used and Microsoft telemetry told them what to prioritise.

Teams is the replacement for SfB, 100% correct, but it's not a version bump, it's going back to the core requirements and rebuilding them in a new modern toolset.

Also, if you user is in Teams Only mode you can place calls from Outlook, just like SfB.

[#11]

@Steven Collier

• If you don't "End" a meeting, participants can continue having conversations, etc. That's such an obvious requirement that...
• Microsoft telemetry must suck at "prioritizing".
• If Teams is the replacement for SfB, it "should at least be" be something of a version bump. Currently, at least for phone functions, it's a version downgrade.
• I haven't trusted Teams enough to test "if you user is in Teams Only mode you can place calls from Outlook, just like SfB." Why isn't that available in Islands mode?

[#12]

@Donovan Lewis 

• Humour me, it's absolutely never been something I needed to do in Skype. Do you end all your meetings every time? I still don't understand the $$ business value in doing this.
• I doubt that, who else ends their meetings?
• Busy on busy, call park, direct routing are all telephony features that are ahead of SfB Online.
• Islands is a mode for trialling Teams out alongside Skype as your main client in lots of ways. Notice how your incoming PSTN calls all ring in Skype.

[#13]

The persistence of Teams that Skype doesn't have and the mobile app alone make Teams a huge upgrade. I've only seen little nit pick stuff people complain about, most of it valid, but overall I can't look at Teams as a downgrade. Yeah it has some glaring things that need improved but it's still most def. an upgrade overall.

As for islands, you can set your Outlook to be your default calling app via settings inside of Teams and checking that box when in Islands, Teams only sets that for you, but you still have the option to override it. Now, this only makes Outlook aware and use Teams for IM etc. But keep in mind your call routing will still go through Skype.

[#14]

• @Steven Collier When I end a web meeting, I want everyone to be disconnected & all participants notified that the meeting has ended. Also, I don't want the meeting participants to continue to have conversations within the meeting.
• It's nice that Teams has features that are ahead of SfB. However, I would have much preferred if it had all the features that are already in SfB, then added/improved from there. I thought that was standard procedure when implementing a replacement product!
• I use currently Islands. Initially it just made me more frustrated whenever I tried to use Teams for phone stuff. Now I just use Skype for everything & check out Teams every few weeks.