Microsoft Teams Rooms vs. Nasdaq Webcasting

We use Microsoft Teams Rooms across all of our main conference suites. This ensure our staff have consistent meeting experiences in out part of the education sector - meetings generally become hybrid fairly frequently and can even extend to pupils or staff working from home. We did try some of the poly equipment in a classroom environment but due to noise levels and the amount of pupils and staff it quickly became a non starter. We were advised to stick with participant numbers aligned to our purchased hardware before we tried this.

Incentivized

• Camera view selection is a nice feature which allows remote users to choose the camera feedback to select for better experience.
• Live reactions like hand claps, thumbs up, raised hands,etc can be used to indicate to presenters that a meeting attendee has a question. This is cool.
• We can connect our laptop seamlessly to the Microsoft Teams Rooms to share our content or presentation which makes things very simple.

Incentivized

• Improve AI Camera to frame participants in large rooms
• no translation captions in real team for multilingual teams
• new elements to introduce quizzes and help with engagement

Microsoft Teams Rooms has been very useful for our small business. As mentioned, it has allowed us to connect with our team more regularly, share important information, and keep productivity up by allowing our team to get on remotely and not have to commute to be together in person.

Incentivized

I consider MTR better because it first allows integration with all the Microsoft apps and is more cost-effective, considering all the included services such as the Office app, Cloud Storage, and email.

Incentivized

• Increase in Staff confidence to use meeting equipment
• less "device failures" during meetings
• More and more staff have reduced the need to travel to each of our sites for a meeting.

Incentivized