Here is What I’d Use in 2026

Zoom vs. Microsoft Groups: What’s totally different and what’s not

I switched between the 2 instruments frequently, and one factor grew to become clear quick: they deal with conferences otherwise. Zoom treats a gathering as its personal second. Groups treats it as one a part of an ongoing workspace.

Each clear up the identical downside, however that distinction modifications how work really flows. The situations beneath are the place I noticed the most important gaps, and the place you would possibly really feel probably the most tangible distinction in your individual day-to-day life.

Zoom vs. Microsoft Groups: The variations

• Assembly format and focus: Zoom retains the assembly UI easy and centered on video, display share, and core controls, so the decision itself stays entrance and heart. Groups locations the assembly inside a chat or channel, with messages and recordsdata sitting alongside the decision, so it seems like one a part of an ongoing workspace.Ease of becoming a member of conferences: Zoom makes becoming a member of calls fast as a result of the assembly exists independently of any broader account setup. Company can enter with minimal friction. Groups work easily when everyone seems to be inside the identical Microsoft 365 group. Exterior contributors can be part of, however their expertise could also be restricted based mostly on the configured visitor entry
• Browser vs. desktop app expertise: Zoom works reliably within the browser for each hosts and visitors, which reduces friction for exterior conferences. Groups helps browser entry, too, however the desktop app works higher for visitors outdoors the group. For exterior calls, Zoom’s browser-first strategy was extra constant.
• Collaboration round paperwork: In Zoom, collaboration is strongest throughout the name via display sharing, annotations, reactions, and whiteboards, whereas follow-up work sometimes strikes into different instruments your group already makes use of.
  In Groups, paperwork, feedback, and follow-ups keep tied to the identical chat or channel, making it straightforward to search out shared recordsdata after the assembly ends.
• Ecosystem and integrations: Zoom matches comfortably into combined instrument stacks and connects with a variety of third-party apps with out assuming a particular productiveness suite. Groups is strongest when paired with Microsoft 365, the place conferences, calendars, recordsdata, duties, and notes all join throughout Outlook, OneDrive, SharePoint, Planner, and Loop.
• AI help and summaries (when enabled): Zoom’s AI options are centered primarily on the assembly itself, serving to with summaries, highlights, and motion objects from particular person calls. Groups’ AI, when out there via Microsoft 365 licenses, can pull context from chats, emails, paperwork, and conferences, so insights stretch past a single name into the remainder of the workspace.
• Recordings and the place they stay: Zoom shops cloud recordings and transcripts (on supported plans) in its personal recording library, which works properly if Zoom is your main assembly instrument. Groups shops recordings and transcripts (when enabled) in OneDrive or SharePoint, so that they sit alongside different mission recordsdata and will be managed with the identical entry controls.
• Massive conferences and occasions: Zoom is usually the go-to for webinars and large-scale occasions. It is acquainted to affix, has a simple circulate, and offers minimal friction for attendees. Groups affords structured occasion codecs like inside city halls, with built-in registration, Q&A moderation, and attendee analytics.
• Exterior vs. inside workflows: Zoom works properly if you’re frequently assembly with individuals outdoors your group; there is not any shared system wanted. Groups matches higher when most of your collaboration occurs internally, with conversations tied to paperwork, duties, and ongoing tasks.
• Video reliability & high quality: Zoom maintains a status for secure audio/video efficiency, particularly in mixed-network or exterior setups. Groups performs properly, too, however the expertise can differ barely based mostly on organizational configuration and bandwidth insurance policies.
• Pricing and admin expertise: Zoom’s pricing facilities round assembly capability, recording options, and webinar choices, making it simple for groups that primarily want video calls. Groups’ pricing will depend on Microsoft 365 licensing, the place conferences are bundled with e-mail, storage, and productiveness instruments. Admin settings, permissions, and visitor entry insurance policies additionally affect how the assembly expertise feels.

Zoom and Microsoft Groups: The similarities

As soon as the key variations are clear, the pure query is: are there baseline gaps I would like to fret about?
In common use, there weren’t. Throughout core areas, each instruments delivered the identical outcomes.

• Video calls behave the identical at a sensible degree. For normal conferences like weekly syncs, mission critiques, and longer discussions with display sharing, each Zoom and Groups behaved equally. Video layouts adjusted easily, display sharing labored with out friction, and participant controls stayed straightforward to handle.
• Hybrid conferences observe the identical playbook. In setups with some individuals in a room and others distant, the circulate stays the identical. Muting, hand raises, breakout rooms, and managing bigger teams work predictably on each platforms.
• Reviewing previous conferences works reliably on each. As soon as recording and transcription are enabled, replaying calls, looking out transcripts, and leaping to particular moments really feel related. The place recordsdata are saved differs, however the assessment expertise would not.
• Chat and light-weight collaboration work the identical in-meeting. Throughout calls, chat, reactions, and fast file sharing behave identically. This issues most in bigger conferences, the place individuals can contribute with out interrupting.
• Cellular participation is absolutely usable, not a fallback. Becoming a member of from a cellphone did not really feel like a compromise on both app. Core controls had been straightforward to succeed in, audio stayed clear, and video tailored easily even when networks modified.
• Bigger conferences keep manageable. For larger classes, like coaching calls, team-wide updates, and inside displays, each instruments dealt with scale properly. Speaker controls, muting massive teams, and retaining classes orderly labored as anticipated.

Now, we all know what these chatbots say they will do, however the proof is within the pudding, which is why I examined them on 11 real-world duties. 

Disclaimer: AI responses might differ based mostly on phrasing, session historical past, and system updates for a similar prompts. These outcomes mirror the fashions’ capabilities on the time of testing.

Zoom vs. Microsoft Groups: How they carried out in actual workflows

1. Exterior consumer conferences

Since a lot of the work entails exterior conversations, the comparability begins by taking a look at how each instruments deal with first-time joins.

On Zoom, these conferences normally started with out friction. I shared the hyperlink, the opposite particular person entered their identify, and we had been speaking virtually instantly. There wasn’t a lot to consider past the dialog itself.

Exterior consumer becoming a member of interface for Zoom

I attempted the identical circulate with Groups. When the opposite particular person was already on Microsoft 365, the be part of expertise was clean. Once they weren’t, becoming a member of concerned a couple of extra steps like selecting the best way to be part of, confirming identification, or ready briefly earlier than getting in.

Exterior consumer becoming a member of interface for Microsoft Groups

Each labored, however the distinction confirmed up in how rapidly the decision really started.

Winner: Zoom