Justin King

My feedback

  1. 17,003 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1609 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    working on a design ... sense feb ...

    Are you though?

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    >We are working on a design with more density in mind. Until this design is solidified we are putting this item back to Under Review.

    You are over-engineering this. A lot. The community has already fixed this themselves.

    https://userstyles.org/users/727497

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    The turn around time on compact mode is ridiculous. 3 years and counting, and we can't remove 3-inch margins from the UI? We're asking for an inch per year?

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    "planning"? How much planning is needed when reducing the space between columns?

    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  2. 24,373 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1962 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    The ability to use multiple Teams accounts at the same time is supported on iOS & Android today. The feature team is continuing to work on support for multiple accounts on desktop and web clients. We’ll keep you posted as we have more details.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    No updates sense December ... nearly 6 months ago and this still doesn't work well....

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    I know Covid has made video conference improvements the priority ... but multi-org collaboration can't be that far behind, can it?

    As said numerous times: while email alerting has improved the story immensely, it still falls short of the ask.

    Right now the guest account model is broken as it provides an _alternative_ experience to federation, and that fact that a user can casually do both makes things impossibly confusing.

    + I can chat with anyone is public chat is enabled. No need for another account.
    + I can be added as a guest if I want to see another team/channel
    - said guest becomes a separate account with unique notifications and chat
    - user now has to watch from multiple orgs for people trying to communicate
    - other users now see multiple instances of said user when they look up his name (both guest and regular account)
    - chaos ensues and companies decide they'd rather give out thier own accounts and skip this guest nonsense.
    - suddenly users now need multiple accounts in order to work outside their company.

    The way Teams interacts with guest accounts as unique accounts is fundamentally broken from a UX perspective even if it's technically accurate. FIX GUEST FEDERATION AND MOST OF THIS WILL GO AWAY. ALLOW MULTIPLE ACCOUNT LOGIN AND THE REST WILL. FAST SWITCHING IS STILL NOT THE ASK.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    It's nearly April, can we have an update, please?

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    > Work is in progress on cross-tenant notification improvements, and support for multiple accounts on desktop will follow. We’ll keep you posted!

    So what's the timeline for each of thee milestones?

    - "Mac will be rolling out soon" . When? Q1? Did it start?
    - "Work is in progress on cross-tenant notification improvements". So does that make it a Q2 effort? Is it also Q1?
    - "and support for multiple accounts on desktop will follow" .... follow? It hasn't even started yet? Does that mean Q3?

    This is turtle's pace for something that could honestly be handled entirely by the client.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Year 3: still working on it.

    I can only conclude that this is a case of over-engineering at this point. Opensource the client and let the user community hack it together. Have a "come-to-jesus" moment and really map out what is needed vs. what the devs would like to include (fast switching was never the ask ... I've I've said for YEARS now in this very post).

    Once a month I check this post for updates ... it spent 10 months with nothing ... then the last two months in 2019 it looked like things were happening ... only to apparently stall out again.

    THIS.
    NEEDS.
    TO.
    HAPPEN.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    First off kudos on the improved user switching .... it's really REALLY fast now which is nice.However we are in a race against time now ...

    ... with the release of F1 licensing for O365, a LOT of my clients are opting to buy this cheap license for contractors meaning my # of accounts has exploded. I'd love to push back and tell them to simply make me a guest instead but the reality is:

    1. The chat feature is bound to the org which makes it extremely difficult to keep up with multi-org conversations (unlike the skype of old which had no issues)
    2. Guests cannot be made owners of teams nor given other certain permissions making them inherently more limited than a dedicated account, so they aren't inclined to make me a guest anyway.

    Basically Teams limitations combined with new F1 pricing of O365 is practically forcing me to need multi-account support asap.

    I think the guest idea in Teams has a lot of potential, but Teams itself needs to work out a couple of kinks for it to work. Mainly:

    1. Chat should NOT be org-bound. You should always be logged in with your primary account and peopel trying to chat with you directly should always be able to ... just like traditional chat apps.

    2. Guest accounts need to be first class citizens. If a org decides that a contractor will make the best PM and thus wants them to be the owner of the Team ... let the org make that assignment.

    If you do this ... multi-account support won't actually be that big of a deal ... at all. Still do it, mind you, but I think you're on the verge of providing something better.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Also, if I'm being added as a guest .... aka I'm techncially only using 1 account .... why do I have to tenant switch to get chat messages? ALA Skype I should _always_ get them regardless of what tenant I'm currently visiting.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    two years and counting here ... please @microsoft lets be certain we aren't over-engineering this.

    For others, lets talk options:

    Best I've found are incognito browser windows for other logins. This way you have multiple logins at once (one using the app, another using your browser), but even that gets a little tough once you hit 3+ because your auth token gets shared in icognito tabs as long as they are open... so that leaves 3 account max:

    1. team app.
    2. browser app.
    3. browser in icognito.

    Now you can add browsers to scale out further (chrome, edge beta, IE, firefox) ... but it becomes unwieldy quickly.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Year is quickly coming to an end .... status?

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    and to drive it home: fast tenant switching is not the ask. At all. Not one of the consolidated complaints is saying "i want to logout faster". We want to either:

    1. login everywhere at once, bypassing the speed problem
    2. have one login receive all information so multiple accounts aren't necessary.

    Ether of those work. Faster logout/login is not the ask.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Adding fuel to the fire:

    The multi-org support in Teams is fundamentally broken. If my primary account is added as a guest into a new org, I have to _switch_ orgs to talk to anyone. This is in stark contrast to simply talking freely in a B2B scenario under skype. While I completely understand org switching is needed as you attach to different SharePoint backends when navigating the actual teams ... ad-hoc chats do not need this. They simply need to be able to .. well ... chat.

    I attached a sample image where I have chats going on in three orgs and my only option is to _constantly_ change orgs to even see what is being said.

    Chat should be global. Never need switching. Only switch Teams/Files section of the client.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    These seem like multiple fundamentally different ideas and as such it may take years before everyone sees what they want. Id suggest NOT merging these into one ask. The largest ask is one of multiple accounts. The key issue here is the _client_. The ask is simple: just let us log into multiple accounts at once, just at you can with Outlook. Build a collapsing tree view on the right so we can easily browse across accounts. No integration, no cross tenant work, no shared channels. Just let me open multiple accounts in the client.Other options that involve possible complex backbend tenant work is nice to have, and speeding logout is cool I guess... But really they miss the ask:. Log into multiple accounts in one client.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    The guest/federation option in Teams is a complete failure from understanding customer needs to it's execution (even if e wanted it, it was done poorly).

    All that is needed is effectively a duplication of what already exists in mail systems like Outlook or other chat systesm like Slack.

    1. buisness creates an account for you (or uses an invite wizard that does this)
    2. you add account to your client
    3. you effectively see messages/mail from all logged in clients.

    Instead, what we got is a complicated guest/federation system that is riddled with "landmines" that keep proper account use from even occuring:

    1. Customer uses invite system to add a user.
    2. If IT setup an account for this user, he has to be careful NOT to select this user otherwise the wong acocunt will be invited to the chanel.
    3. If IT setup a mailbox and tried ot be nice and setup a forwarding rule to the invited person ... that person might still get an invite email ... that will not work.
    4. But if IT setup a contact, or someone else did this setup before so said user already exists as a guest in AzureAD ... then it's OK to select that user. Good luck knowing when.
    5. Then the guys accepting the invite needs to be careful. Becuase if he ever created both a Microsoft Account and has a federated account with the same email address ... then he risks opening the link under the wrong account and never being able to use Teams as you can only log into 1 at a time ... meaning full logout log in to change orgs.
    6. All the above needs to be done just so that we can have .... an accelerated logout/login process with the client that doens't even amke it possilbe to see messages from mulitple orgs.

    It's just an awful experience. All you needed to do was allow teams to log-into multiple accounts at once and make a light-weight user-creation process for teams (like slack does) and all of the above hoop jumping would be resolved.

    PLEASE: reconsider if guest account/federation is even really nessisary for teams. All the user base wants is a simple multi-account login. Outlook does this perfectly, so we know you guys can pull it off.

    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  3. 82 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    10 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  4. 266 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  5. 8,939 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    735 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    We are rapidly approaching a YEAR for a simple UI problem. Phone app has this solved already, why is it so hard to update the desktop?

    A YEAR.

    Just open source the client already, we'd have it fixed the same day.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Seriously, how is the attached still a thing? Last update is coming up on a _year_ for a basic UI change.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Please note that this ask is scattered all over this user voice, some with hundreds of votes so this is actually a bigger pain than it looks just from this thread.

    This has been a UX issue sense day 1, and one that I myself will trip over daily despite being aware of it because the UI design here is just that bad.

    Hopefully now that this has made it to page 1 we can see some progress.

    I would suggest a new panel for replies within a conversation. Basically browse _into_ a conversation, just like you do with any message board today. It's intuitive.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    Look, with some MSPaint and the ability to remove those massive margins I can easily add a column and fix the problem

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    How is this so difficult that nearly a year later you haven't figured this out?

    Kill the 3 inch margins that Teams uses like it's some kind of term paper, and add a chat column to the left of the post view (like you already do for chat while editing docs). Done.

    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  6. 19 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  7. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  8. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  9. 28 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    8 comments  ·  Public » Bugs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    This is not getting nearly enough up-votes, Im guessing because most are hoping multiple login support will fix the issue for them.

    The bottom line is if you are invited as a guest to multiple organizations, chatting becomes a nightmare. In older skype like chat systems, the user could simply chat with you as long as they were federated. Under Teams, I can only chat with somone when I change into the context of their organization. Otherwise I get garbage like this attached imag.

    Having to constantly switch orgs is ridiculous and pointless. I can see it for the literal teams (you're switching into their share-point backend) but for simple, ad-hoc communication it completely fails.

    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  10. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  11. 5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  12. 14 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  13. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 
  14. 7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  15. 15,093 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    847 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Justin King commented  · 

    In an Agile development workflow this is a critical feature.

    In competing products, a channel or group chat can be made around specific stories or defects, and said channel will only live as long as the story does. This makes for an "ideal" experience as multiple people can join, discuss, and contribute on very targeted topics confidently and archiving when complete.

    permanent channels discurages this behavior, and instead starts to lend it self to generalized "topics" which quickly become 100+ member messes that people stop following.

    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  16. 280 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    59 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  17. 133 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    20 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King supported this idea  · 
  18. 12 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Justin King shared this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base