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 firstname.lastname@example.org if you are still seeing issues.
415 commentsComments are closed
ideally i do not want to have to open either a video or voice call in order to share screens.
sometimes it is because you are already on the phone with the person or multiple people and you just want to show something from your screen to someone.
you dont want to get the entire group to move to a teams call so you can share a screen. plus you may only want to share your screen with your team members on the conference call not everyone on the conference call.
we use this ability in skype all the time and so far is the only complaint i have from my employees about switching to TEAMS
Marc Wenning commented
I might just be in a chat and want to share my desktop, no need to open a video just to do that. Similar to Skype, you dont have to be in a call to share your dekstop. Not all users may have cameras on their machines either, so it doesnt make sense to force a video call just to share a dekstop.
Bryan Hunt commented
I work from home and I might still be in my pajamas. Also if you are on a low bandwidth connection, I don't want the video to degrade the screen sharing performance.
Brian Nipper commented
There are times when I'm working from home due to not feeling well or any other reason and while I want to share my screen with someone to get feedback/provide assistance, but I don't want to video chat.
Hi, Suphatra. In our case, it's because sometimes you are chatting with a person who is using Teams on their remote PC without audio. It would just be easier to share the screen from chat rather than make a call, connect, and then share the screen.
I think when this fist was recommended, the screen share option wasn't available from voice calls, too. It seems like it's now possible to screen share in a voice call rather than just a video call.
Most of our computers are desktops without webcams.
Also, we have users that need help by being walked through steps, using programs. For example, I handle the graphics development at our facility, but a lot of time other users have questions, and would like to show me what is on their screen. We don't need to see their face, we'd like to go straight into screen sharing.
Why tightly couple video calls with screensharing? not all calls are video (esp with video unsupported on mobile).
Matthew Steeples commented
Sometimes you're already on a call with someone else (eg a conference call) and someone wants to show you something briefly. You can't be in 2 calls at the same time.
Additionally, you may be on the call on one device, but actually want the screensharing to happen on another one, which means the call and the screenshare need to be on separate channels
Yoav Rheims commented
I'd like to add the whiteboard feature from SfB is missing too :(
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.