TimTim

My feedback

  1. 1,352 votes
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)

      We’ll send you updates on this idea

      60 comments  ·  Public » Video and Phone Calling  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
      TimTim commented  · 

      I'm concerned that this will be confusing regardless of the implementation. Notification sync'ing between the two has potential, but conversation history? S4B has no concept of a channel, so what channel in Teams is the S4B history going to sync with? A private Teams chat with all members of the S4B chat? And visa-versa?

      Too many apps with overlap now...maybe S4B should be retired. :-)

    • 3,875 votes
      Sign in
      Check!
      (thinking…)
      Reset
      or sign in with
      • facebook
      • google
        Password icon
        I agree to the terms of service
        Signed in as (Sign out)

        We’ll send you updates on this idea

        233 comments  ·  Public » Privacy and Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

        Hi everyone,

        You may have already heard this because we announced this date at our public release of Teams last month, but I thought I’d email everyone just in case they didn’t get the news. We’ve publicly committed to a date for this feature, and it is June!

        Its a difficult feature to pull off, and we want to make sure to get it right for you. Thank you for your patience and most of all, thank you for bringing this idea for us! We’re excited to soon be able to mark the #1 UserVoice item as complete. :-)

        Sincerely,
        Suphatra

        TimTim commented  · 

        This is a must have. Today's teams span across company borders. It needs to be easy and seamless, no requirement for a MS account. +10K

        Slack has pretty much set the bar, so Teams needs to _at least_ meet it. The area where Teams has a chance to beat-up on Slack is for all Office 365 users/companies due to the seamless integration...BUT Teams _must have_ feature parity. :-)

        TimTim supported this idea  · 
      • 2,269 votes
        Sign in
        Check!
        (thinking…)
        Reset
        or sign in with
        • facebook
        • google
          Password icon
          I agree to the terms of service
          Signed in as (Sign out)

          We’ll send you updates on this idea

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

          Hi everyone,

          So a little bit of context for everyone who newly voted for this feature.

          When you first asked for “Private Channels” we believed this could be solved by the new feature that we recently rolled out — the ability to create either Public or Private teams. Hence, the status on this item was “Working on it!”

          However, the strong feedback from the community has been that this does not solve your original problem. So, we’re pulling this into review and evaluating ways we can implement this. It’s not an easy fix, so we’ll need some time. I’ll make sure to update you along the way.

          Thanks and please continue to give us your great feedback. Your voice helps guide this product in the right direction!

          Sincerely,
          Suphatra

          TimTim supported this idea  · 
          TimTim commented  · 

          Yes, private channels are important. One use case is specific team members may be assigned to a client's project. There would be a channel built for this project but only those assigned to the project should be in the channel.

        Feedback and Knowledge Base