Enable screen sharing without audio/video call
Enable an option to start a screen sharing session without starting a an audio.video call. This is a common use case in our organization.
UPDATE: I have confirmed with the feature team that this is, in fact, functioning as you expect – you can share your entire desktop or a specific window directly from a private chat session, without starting audio or video. The mute microphone button is enabled so you are able to easily add audio by “unmuting”, but we realize this is causing confusion. We are working on further experience improvements.
Please feel free to respond to email@example.com if you are still seeing issues.
526 commentsComments are closed
Looks like the main idea has been established. Currently in Skype for Business we use screen sharing much more than we use video conf. Often an impromptu screen share that comes during the course of a phone call.
c b commented
This is why Microsoft fails at providing what customers ask for. It is not for you to be convinced that a certain way the product is used is right or wrong. You should assume that the product gets used in ways you won't think about and you should expand its flexibility to be usable outside your own box.
Why would you do this without video.. oh my gosh... first off, Skype for Business lets you do this. So just for consistency when I ask our users to transition to Teams, you'd offer the same capability. But the really simple and obvious answer to this, is that there might be a conference already happening via a phone. Or.. which is very likely, it's just a chat. Maybe there is a very loud environment (which is the case in our company that does manufacturing) and so voice would be worthless. But a quick message of "hey, look at this behavior"... and a showing of it is really fast and priceless.
Why not just do what the customers ask for? :)
Kevin Ruschman commented
Thanks Suphatra! As an IT admin, I used SfB to quickly have someone in my company show me their screen if they were having issues with something instead of having to run around to everyone's desk all of the time. That is the major feature that we lost moving to Teams. We also are not setup with webcams on headsets so doing a video call is not an option.
YES absolutely want/need this- very often need to show colleagues something or quickly help fix something (please add remote control!) without being able to talk out loud. Finding a conference room for a screen share is not flexible
Chris Koiak commented
Thanks for asking for feedback!
The majority of our 20+ team do not have a headset as they have phones on their desks. Having to create a call to screen share is pointless and feels cumbersome.
As Skype for business (Lync) had this feature it feels like a step backwards.
Jens Engelmann commented
1. We're accustomed to it (because it's a Skype for Business.feature)
2. It's not a good ux practice to start something else (video call) to get another "hidden" function (screen sharing)
3. Most of our workstations don't have webcam/mic for security reasons. So the user never would try to start a video call (even if it might be possbile).
4. The most important reason: Most of the time we're just texting and sharing screen... so why should we drop a video call?
Because this application is used in a business context, for me that means I need to share my screen with somebody very often but hardly ever have to make a video call. Being able to share screens directly would cut out one step in the process, this may not seem like much but when you need to share screens as often as we do it can be quite annoying.
Miguel Caldeira commented
I'm traveling all the time. Streaming a video call from public hotspots or through my ISP skyrockets my bill or makes it too slow just to share a screen... I can easily type while sharing it.
There is lots of this kind scenarios, when we are using screen sharing without calling.
1. You are speaking with somebody by phone (he is in not silence room and have no headphones) and you need to share screen. Then in SfB you are using only share screen.
2. You are chatting and need to see someone's screen for a while. Just to show something and then go back to chatting.
Thomas R-m commented
This request doesn't come from a functional but an ux requirement. It's simple counterintuitive to start a video call (even if one doesn't have a camera at all) to share the screen.
Hi. It's an unnecessary step. Most collaboration we do doesn't require video. Often we are on a phone call.
Daniel Haliscak commented
1. because it is possible to do that in Skype for Bussines - http://2.1m.yt/_jWc0Ei.png
2. because i work in small team(8 people), in one room. if i want to show them something, they dont need to come to me a every time. i can just share screen and i can talk to them
Gordan Redzic commented
Echoing others, sometimes you pick a phone make the call and then just want to have a quick screen share. Its a basic functionality that should be present.
Joe Maslanka commented
like others are saying... with skype for biz we do direct presenting of desktop all the time... and hardly ever with video or audio. We already have a corporate phone system and many times a day I get a call on that followed by a desktop/application share from other developers.
We don't want to do the extra and unneeded steps to do the video call. Forcing video calling makes people share less... the whole idea here is for the team to share more.
We had to stop using teams for now until we can do this... well this feature and the fact that some of our devs literally can't read the font on their laptops.
It is a feature of Skype for business that we use all the time. Literally it is something we use every day. I would love to have my team move to Teams, but we don't want to have to use both tools and we can't move without this feature.
Many people don't like video, so they don't want to accept the connection. They go so far to cover the camera, but if its not covered they will just make up an excuse. Also, it takes up more screen space which is already a huge issue with the desktop app and how space inefficient the chat window is, now you want to have a video window and a screen share window? Finally, if bandwidth sucks the experience is just worse. Unfortunately hotels and on the road internet or wifi speeds suck, rather have delayed screen refreshes than connection problems with video.
Skype for Business gets this right, although the interface isn't great with the way the chat window is presented its one click, quick share, easy. Video is just not popular, please make it a easy choice with multiple buttons.
I would have to check, but what if the computer doesn't have a camera, is the option even available?
What if my desktop don't have mic and webcam. They won't be able to call me
We have our own phone system. Sometimes were on conference calls using land lines. How is it not obvious that this is a necessary feature? :)
Because our team is spread across 3 continents and we have multiple calls every week with people spread all over the world and some in remote locations with limited bandwidth. Why add video overhead on a call with 15 people where most have highly limited bandwidth? I'm already in a voice call, just let me share a screen...
If anyone has used Screenhero (now part of Slack), you would be clamoring for that same level of screen sharing goodness. I'd be all for that level of screen sharing / collaboration without the need for video