Christoph

My feedback

  1. 1,533 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    150 comments  ·  Public » Desktop  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  2. 144 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    13 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  3. 98 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    7 comments  ·  Public » Settings  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  4. 10 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 » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 
  5. 126 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    15 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 

    Yes, making the subject line visible would also help users distinguish between replying to an existing conversation and starting a new conversation.

    And making it possible to require a subject line (at least in certain channels) would basically make it impossible for users to mistakenly start a new conversation.

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  6. 70 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  7. 166 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    45 comments  ·  Public » Meetings  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    declined  ·  Warren responded

    Hate to share bad news, but this request was declined by the feature team.

    -Warren

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  8. 1,247 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    working on it  ·  136 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 

    Any news on this? It's been "planned" for almost a year now...

    I would like to emphasize the importance of quoting parts of messages so as to show exactly what you are replying to. Is this what you are planning? (quotemaster unfortunately only quotes the entire message)

    Christoph commented  · 

    > Simply copy the line of text that you wish to quote and use “Shift” + “>” (greater than symbol) to insert someone’s comments as a quote.

    Thanks for pointing that out, Warren, but I'm not sure if this is specific to US keyboards or if I'm missing something else because for me, “Shift” + “>” produces the greater than symbol (and formats the current line as a quote) but it does not insert the content of the clipboard (why should it anyway?). So your workaround works, but it is quite a bit more laborious than you seem to suggest. Also, from that quote, there is, of course, no way of telling who the original author was or which post the quote comes from. (I hope this will be included in the actual feature once it's released).

    Anyway, thanks for pointing out the workaround!

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  9. 11,966 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1233 comments  ·  Public » UX/Design  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    As we announced at Microsoft Ignite 2019 this morning, we are excited to confirm that Multi-window capabilities are coming to Microsoft Teams, and will start rolling out to the public ring early next year!

    Thanks,
    Alex & the Teams team

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  10. 763 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    on the backlog  ·  51 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 

    @Warren One year later, this is still on the backlog, I suppose, but could you post a quick update on whether there are any new developments? Even negative news are better than no news...

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  11. 3,797 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    423 comments  ·  Public » Messaging  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 

    It's great to see that things are happening and I appreciate that you are asking users for feedback. I was a bit surprised, though, when I saw the three options to are considering in the survey. Given those alternatives, I dare say that the result is quite predictable: most people will obviously prefer "New conversation". ("New chat" will be the second option, but most will probably reject it as too informal and/or potentially confusing as the term is already used elsewhere in Teams. And "New Post", frankly, should not have been in the survey in the first place because it contradicts the very purpose of distinguishing replies from new conversations, which is what this "feature request" is about.)

    So I'm left wondering what the purpose of this survey is, after all. There are other terms that could meaningfully have competed with "New Conversation", such as "New Topic", or "New Thread". The fact that it they were omitted suggest that someone at Microsoft is fighting trying to explain to their colleagues that "New Conversation" is the best option and needs some backing for that from the users. Fair enough. I also think that is the best option, but it's sad to see that some people at microsoft don't see this as already evident from what has been said here over the past 1.5 years.

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  12. 128 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    15 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  13. 3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Bug Reports » Client - Desktop  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 
  14. 468 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    79 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    working on it  ·  Warren responded

    Unfortunately we hit some snags and this has moved back to “working on it”. The team is working to make some corrections and I hope to have a release date in the near future. I’ll keep you posted with what I hear.
    -Warren

    Christoph commented  · 

    Just to be clear: what exactly is being worked on here? Is it what was originally requested in the OP or what Suphatra described in her post, i.e. the invite link workaround?

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  15. 362 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    on the backlog  ·  16 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  16. 32 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 » Search  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  17. 430 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    110 comments  ·  Public » Teams and Channels  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    partially done  ·  Warren responded

    As mentioned in the prior status, the channel limit was raised from 100 to 200.

    In the near future a retention limit will be set so you can still go back and reinstate a channel you had deleted. Once the retention period has expired then the channel will get a hard delete which will free up the space and no longer count toward the 200 channel limit.

    This will help with some of the issues you have voiced in the comments below.
    But I understand many of you wish the limit to be further increased. I will continue to provide your votes and comments to the feature team.

    -Warren

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  18. 1,043 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    166 comments  ·  Public » Notifications  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    under review  ·  Warren responded

    This item is still being reviewed and pending a decision. No new details at this time.

    -Warren

    Christoph commented  · 

    I’m not sure if auto-follow is the better for all channels (people may get annoyedabout having to repeatedly unfollow new niche channels) it would be great to let channel creators decide whether this should be an opt-in or an opt-out channel.

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  19. 360 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    declined  ·  25 comments  ·  Public » People  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph commented  · 

    So this has just been declined. Why? My hope is that this request is seen as redunant and that what is requested will nevertheless be imlemented. In that case: which issue should we turn to?

    If the request is outrightly rejected, I’d like to understand why.

    Christoph supported this idea  · 
  20. 455 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    102 comments  ·  Public » Mobile  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Christoph supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base