How can we make Microsoft Teams better?

Better visual delineation between `Reply` and `Start a new conversation`

It's very confusing to new users that there is a difference between replying to an existing conversation and starting a new one within a channel. This is a visual thing as much as anything else. The 'reply' buttons are not naturally attractive if you just want to start typing a message. There should be a logical gap between the bottom of a conversation and 'start a new conversation'. 'Start a new conversation' needs to be separated visually, as if it's a second order command rather than a first order...reply.

2,451 votes
Sign in
(thinking…)
Password icon
Signed in as (Sign out)

We’ll send you updates on this idea

Stephen Ellis shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

333 comments

Sign in
(thinking…)
Password icon
Signed in as (Sign out)
Submitting...
  • Ryan Spooner commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    @skprufo left Microsoft and it seems the remaining team don't care much about this User Voice page and being reactive to customer feedback.

  • Darris Martin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    "We are shipping this SO soon. By the end of the year, the team says. Woo hoo!" So.... What happened?

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Our conversation threads are a mess. The reply button is often hidden behind the start new conversation box. Please fix asap!

  • Derek commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This is the one thing holding us back from deploying Teams to the business.

  • Panagiotis commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Many ms Team users in my company start new conversations instead of replying to threads because of this annoying design! Please Please Do something... Put a Plus sign but do not leave the "Start new conversation" edittext component down there!

  • Jacob commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Oh golly yes! If this were the only feature in the next update it would be worth all the bandwidth and hassle to publish and install.

  • Johan Appelgren commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Any progress with this? As it is now the conversations tab of a channel is almost unreadable since most people can't figure out how to reply. Or they can't be bothered to use Reply since it requires more clicks.

  • Robert Y commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    This really needs to be fixed. There’s a high number of replies-as-new-conversations happening in our Teams that’s extremely confusing when the conversation gets going.

  • Ryan Spooner commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    What's happening with this one? Suphatra has now apparently left Microsoft, so who's keeping on top of User Voice updates now?

  • Bill R commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Looking forward to the change(if it happens). Too many people in my company start new conversations instead of replying to threads. it's mildly irritating.

  • Edouard Paumier commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I think also this is one of the major root cause of dissatisfaction of users in regard to the user interface, though hidden under misunderstanding and confusion.

    Because users do not understand this concept of "conversation", they start creating multiple ones, and as a result
    - The display is extremely not compact. The result is a user voice with 7800+ votes on it (https://microsoftteams.uservoice.com/forums/555103-public/suggestions/17408641-compact-mode).
    - If one person of the team uses the reply feature on one of those conversation, the order is rearranged and conversations makes no sense. As a result I heard people saying "Stop using reply, it breaks the order of my messages".

    Because of this one simple missing feature, the whole concept is unknown to users and going down the drain.

    I would like to add a rationale on this :
    - The probability I want to add a second message related to the one I just send is really high.
    - The probability I want to start two parallel conversations just one after the other is extremely low.

    Therefore, after creating a conversation, focusing on the "reply" instead of staying on the "start conversation" makes much more sense.

  • Steve Dohm commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Filled out the survey. It's been a quarter, no update, no comment. It shouldn't be this hard.

  • Sam Hall commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I rarely use Teams, but occasionally someone mentions me in a channel so I get and email, which forces me to open the platform. Then I tend to reply by starting a new conversation, then I realise my mistake which enrages me and I give up on it once again.

  • Christopher Di Biase commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Something definitely needs to be done to improve the channel experience. Even I often accidentally create new threads when trying to reply to a thread, just because of how the window scrolls. Perhaps it would make sense to make the "start a new conversation" a button instead of a text field at the bottom of the window to make it less likely that a user will click there instead of on "reply"

  • Marcus Diddle commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Agreed, this needs changed. My organization is new to Teams, and as simple a concept as it seems, there are far too many people who are starting new conversations when they should be replying. My vote would be to hide the "Start New conversation" section altogether behind a "Compose" button that needs clicked first. Change the Reply button to the default, ready-to-be-typed-in text bar. Essentially make Replying the default behavior rather than Starting a new conversation.

  • Rae Jobst commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    For users new to Teams, they frequently start a new conversation rather than click reply.

    Simply remove the need to click Reply - just have the field open and the visual prompt on where to type your reply is much clearer.

    Looking forward to seeing this changed - thanks Microsoft for listening to the users on this.

Feedback and Knowledge Base