Declined with no explanation? Why can it not be collapsed? Mine can be about half the width it currently is and still be wide enough!
Wasting space like this in a UI is silly, if it can't be collapsed, at least make it re-sizeable!
If I'm working on a document in the main panel, I want to have as much real estate as possible!
Sorry for the delay on an update on this one! I’m hunting down the status for you and will update once I have it.
Also, if you are interested in participating in testing or surveys for this, just tweet me at @skprufo.
Pretty much one of the very first things I went looking to add to our IT team, and could not find!
We currently have a "Call out calendar" created in Excel, and have that added as a tab. It works, but would prefer a real calendar solution.
Planner has a calendar view, which we thought about using, but have each "Call out" entry as a task is feasible.
I was really frustrated to see that the previous feedback was closed. Even more frustrated to find there is no way to query the closure/resolution.
Reading the feedback, it was clear what was being asked for. Admins do not want installations into user profiles. I would love to hear Microsoft's reasoning behind this!!
Not only does it consume unnecessary space in a users' profile, consume additional bandwidth for every download/update, it's just not manageable from an admin perspective.
If someone uninstalls the app after it has been deployed via MSI, and then they want to start using it, we have to **** about with cleanup scripts on a per user basis? Why?
What's wrong with a traditional program files installation?
We are only just testing Teams, and before I'd even looked at deployment options, you know how I found out about it's install process? I was shadowing a user on a server that did not have it installed, and I saw they were running Teams! I had a look at the file location and it turned out it was in their profile. I was disgusted to see that this had been installed and used without our knowledge. Google saw the error of their ways with this and gave enterprises a proper MSI installer, why can Microsoft not do the same?
This feature request is still in the works. I hope to have more updates soon. I’ll keep you posted.
My god this is annoying. Who designs these products?
Why contradict a UI paradigm that has existed for god knows how long? If I sort by a column, remember it and stick with it.
If I sort alphabetically, go into a folder looking for something, then go back and it has changed my sort, I have to resort to find my next folder to look in........that's just dumb.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the feature team has declined this request. The topic will remain open for votes and comments.
Teams is supposed to replace S4B with feature parity.
Why is this declined if S4B supports standard Skype user integration? It would need this feature to reach feature parity!
Teams doesn't even yet support external S4B contacts as I understand it, so both features need to be implemented!