
Integration with Microsoft 365: If you already subscribe to Microsoft 365 for using apps like Word and Excel, Teams is likely part of your subscription already. We focused on determining the primary strength of each business messaging app, hopefully helping you match your needs to the area where each app shines.
Slack messaging for free#
You can try Slack for free before deciding whether you want to migrate to a paid subscription tier. It is equally beneficial for internal communications among team members and for external communications with clients and vendors. This app requires almost no learning curve. For businesses that have quite a few employees working in different locations, including at home, Slack gives them the ability to easily stay in close contact. Slack is simply the best messaging app for the majority of organizations because of how easy it is to adapt to almost any situation. The strength of Slack, meanwhile, is in its versatility.
Slack messaging trial#
For those who want to try the Microsoft 365 Business Basic pricing tier, which includes access to Teams, a 30-day free trial period is available.

For those large organizations that already make use of Microsoft 365 apps, Teams works seamlessly with them. Teams excels in hosting large video conferences and live events as well. It has a host of integrations geared around file sharing and cloud storage that make it easy to find that key document you last accessed several months ago and that you need to show to the entire team.

Large teams seem to gain the most benefit from using Microsoft Teams for business messaging. Microsoft Teams has some nice features, but it doesn’t quite measure up to the high bar that Slack sets. Slack’s app is easy to use, works on any device, and delivers what it promises. Roughly a decade later, Slack is still the messaging app to beat, including in the Microsoft Teams vs.
Slack messaging full#
Once we had cross-examined all the data available, we were able to provide many potential conclusions for the state of the workplace messaging industry.įor the full results (the juicy stuff), and a more graphical representation of the full data, visit the Mio Workplace Messaging Report available here.The reliance on business messaging apps really took off when Slack joined the market in 2013 and introduced a highly efficient means of communicating. Here he discusses where Slack, Microsoft, and Cisco are all excelling in their own areas.

Matthew Finnegan also covered the report for Computer World. Rich Tehrani picked apart the report and highlighted key findings ahead of the Slack IPO. Marketplace cited the report’s findings in an article and radio show exploring how Slack has changed the workplace. It has already attracted significant media attention. ReactionĪt the time of writing, the Mio Workplace Messaging Report has been out a week.

You can read more on that in the full Workplace Messaging Report here. This result gives us even more insight into co-existence between vendors. Which one of the following apps do you feel delivers the best end-user experience?Ĭisco Webex Teams and Slack tied for the first spot in this category.ģ1% of overall respondents said that Cisco Webex Teams provides the best user experience.ģ1% of overall respondents said that Slack provides the best user experience.Ģ2% of overall respondents said that Microsoft Teams provides the best user experience. Best workplace messaging app for user experience As above, this may change since Amy Chang announced a unified collaboration app for users of both Cisco Jabber and Cisco Webex Teams.ģ8.5% of overall respondents said they expect to have more Slack users in the next two years. The results show regardless of the change from instant messaging to team collaboration, Microsoft Teams is favorable for future workplace messaging plans.Ĥ1% of overall respondents said they expect to have more Cisco Webex Teams users in the next two years. Understanding the differences between Skype for Business and Microsoft Teams will play a big part in the decision IT managers are facing.
