I really like Teams. I do. But the current chat layout is not suited for professional chats. It's way to space consuming. It looks like something imported from MSN with smiley's that take half of the screen. I would say that Slack have nailed it because they focused on the ability keeping a tight window with lots of chat text visible. In Teams the window is full and starts scrolling after like 10 sentences.
We’re currently working on defining a compact mode experience. I will post more details when we have more to share.
Just started using Teams and liking it for the most part, but totally agree here. There's no reason the minimum width of the chat window needs to be 1/3 of the desktop and have super wide margins.
Luis Garcia commented
Last update was over a month ago. Whats the status of this?
I have seen this suggestion in other locations. I think its really needed. If my team had that we would most likely move away form Slack. But until its easier to read and more compact I don't think its that great of a chat program.
I also would like this improvement. Its honestly the #1 issue I have so far for Teams. If the chat was more compact and more like Slack my team would switch.
I have to pile on. Very disappointed with the lack of energy around actioning this. I may be in the minority but I REALLY have to force myself to use MS Teams for collaboration. I was happy and comfortable collaborating all day in Slack. The fact that my organization is well invested in Microsoft tooling and solutions makes Teams the ideal pick, but it is sorely lacking in a usable UX that makes me and my teams more productive. I would guess that a majority of people would prefer the UX of Slack vs MS Teams. This needs more than a minor change, I want to see the context of a conversation at a glance. I want to be able to see who is active in the channel, and see at a glance who are the names in the conversation and if I need to get involved. I don't want to be doing a lot of scrolling or clicking through the uber tabs like Chat and Teams in order to collaborate meaningfully. You guys have the reach and you have the platform, this tool could really be a game changer. Instead it feels like a significant step down from Slack and I think most developers who are used to a more mature collaboration tool will see it in a similar light.
On the left navigation, it shows my contact's name, the first line of the last communication, then a blank space. I'd like to have a setting where I can get more names to show. I only care to see the name, not the first line of last communication, and the blank space is wasted space. Similar to Communicator, Lync, and SkypeForBusiness, I'd rather see more contacts view (without having to scroll down), less wasted space.
How can we tell if the update has made it's way to our tenant? I had a quick look - I can't see any differences.
Can we get a true roadmap to show how "compact" teams is ever likely to get? Then we can make decisions on adoption over other more corporate style chat tools.
2 months later, no updates. How do you roll them out?
+1 here it would be nice to have a slack compact view type layout. Don't need the cute bubble looking ux need to get as much data into one screen.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Even if it looked like a clone of Skype it would be way ahead of where it is.
It seems like there's a box around EVERYTHING in the UI which really clutters it up. :)
Some users may be ecstatic at a view that pops up a single chat box with just one word on each line, embraced with fireworks and dancing bears, and then disappears in 10 seconds. That would be maximally FUN, and therefore it should be the ONLY option. Meanwhile. the rest of the world who has to use it as a productivity tool instead of for entertainment can keep waiting for the option that allows us to 'fix' it. Oh wait, MS did develop it for maximal fun. So shiny! This is why I use Linux kernel.
BTW, IRC is now about 30 years old and is still incredibly functional compared to this shiny stuff. Feel free to mark this as inappropriate (even though it is spot-on topic).
What could work would be keeping the normal, bloated, unproductive, teenage-girl, emoticon, layout (if you must) with the OPTION to go as compact as possible, where a single screen view could print 50-100 lines of chat text.
RECAP: a default that works for noobs, and an option that works for people that actually need to work with it as a tool.
I, for one, am very disappointed that our company's IT team has forced this on us as our only sanctioned collaboration tool. It's currently a huge step backwards in our ability to be productive.
Do these changes apply only to the desktop apps or to the web view as well?
Right now a single post , takes 3 big lines to display (name/time, post, reply icon)
these could be collapsed to a single line and save screen real estate (and improve UX)
I am trying to convince my organization to move to MS Teams, but without a layout that takes up as little space as Skype's person-list does, it's going to be a SUPER hard sell. Most of the time, I don't need to see what is happening in chats or teams, because they're not buzzing all of the time with new information. Sometimes, I'm just working on my own projects, and need to jump over to talk to a person. At that moment, all I need is to see what people are available (and not entire personal or team conversations). Then, after I have chosen a team or person to engage with, THAT is when I need to see the previous conversation and have space to send a new message. Before that point, forcing the conversation to remain visible is just taking up space. While I'm not working in Teams, the fact that it takes up so much space is a negative - it eats up real estate I am trying to use for Design projects, for example.
This is what I understand to be a compact business layout: I essentially need it to replace Skype as a chat client, but involve the "Slack"-type functionality WHEN I NEED TO DIVE IN DEEPER into team work. What you're saying by keeping the entire window maximized is that you don't really care what the user's process is, as long as your product "looks good". This is sacrificing User Experience to hold on tightly to Visual Design, at the expense of users loving your product. And for a product that boasts productivity/efficiency, this seems counterproductive.
Accuraty / Jeremy commented
Still nothing here. Checked for updates and it says I am up to date. If something has been delivered as "incremental changes" - please take the time to show us before and after screenshots. As I see it, nothing reasonable has been done to address the problem.
Damon Betlow commented
Anyone seen the improvement yet? Not sure how incremental it was...
I am not seeing a noticeable improvement in the minimization of wasted space. I can still only fit a small amount of messages on the screen at a time. We used to run Slack and I have a dozen people just in our POC nagging me that they miss Slack because of its cleaner interface and want to go back to it. Please add more options so that we can continue using this product and so that we can recommend it for the wider business.
On my 1920-wide screen the chat in the desktop app is limited to 844 pixels wide. At least that's the size of the horizontal lines, there's still more space eaten up by the padding for other elements. Why the limit? Why not simply make the chat the same width as the containing panel? If I don't want it that wide I'll change the window size, I promise.
At full screen on that monitor the team/channel list is 360px wide. Sure it gets smaller when I reduce the window size, but why can't I resize it to something smaller myself? When we're embedding webpages and other content in tabs, then can't get enough horizontal space to view the page as it should be without making it essentially full-screen, it's frustrating.
Why not give us a theme editor that allows us to at least control some of the layout options like discussion width, padding, etc.
Please make a theme or option to have Teams use less white space, less line spacing, etc. The low information density makes it difficult to follow longer threads.