Feedback on the new UI

Surprised this morning with the new look. First it took 6 attempts before the server responded to my logon request. Not ideal when you are trying to do remote support.

Second problem is there is now a bunch of old machine names that are showing as offline that I was trying to delete and I get an error when deleting them.

Third there are now duplicates for all of the groups I had created, and I don't see a way to delete them

4th and probably most annoying is that about half the devices I had set up now show that they need an update, but when I looked up how to update them , I can't get to the screens that your help text show.

Great experience with the new version!

To activate teamviewer remote control I had to make my client use another remote control system!

I really congratulate those who have studied the new interface.

THANK YOU for the humiliation!

I'm a 1 person show ... my company's only IT person. I've been using PDQ deploy to install Teamviewer on all of our machines so that I can get remote co-access to my end-users machine to support them. This new version is absolutely a nightmare. It's worse than beta software with the bugs, the horrible GUI, the serious degradation in performance, and oftentimes the compelte lack of functionality. The software looks horible, is hard to use, way too many clicks, and in the end, doesn't work!

Since I have a business account, I called their support when this surprise version was implemented because I could no longer use it without each of my end users creating an account and logging in (that's never going to happen!). However, they were so innundated that the phone line went to a message telling me to make a ticket online and then it hung up - even though one of the 'features' of a paid accoun is phone support. So I created a ticket, but never heard back from them.

I called back later in the day and was able to get into the call queue . I spoke with someone who was nice, but told me that with my business account, I should not be installing the full version on end-users machines, but I should be installing only the Host version. So I went through the process of generating a host to install. I deployed that on several test machines. The Host is garbage. Sometimes the install works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes the machine is remotely controllable, sometimes it isn't. If I try to configure unattended remote access, sometimes I can get it to allow my account to manage the machine, sometimes it won't accept my username and password... sometimes I enter my username and password and it just hangs there and nothing happens. Totally inoperable, totally inconsistent across the board!

Since we have multiple locations, I have the machines I manage organized into different groups by location. No longer can you drag and drop to move machines & device into the group they should be in. Furthermore, with the Host, sometimes a machine I've installed it on shows up in the management console, but most often it doesn't show up at all! The host says it is managed by (my email address), but it doesn't show up in my TeamViewer anywhere. If it does show up in Teamviewer, then I am not able to move the device into the correct group in the TeamViewer app.

I created a host which has our logo and "supposedly" puts the machine in the correct group, but it never puts the machine in a group - the machines are just lost in the ether somewhere. I deployed the exact same host setup.exe to 5 machines and 3 of them had the branding and 2 did not... 2 of them have the god-aweful new GUI where you have to make 2 extra clicks to find the TeamviewerID. 2 of them were managed by my account, and 3 of them I cannot get them to accept my account management.

One of the main reasons we've used teamviewer in the past was simplicity and consistency. This this 10 steps in the wrong direction. This new software is complete garbage, and I'm strongly considering moving to something else. My end users are going to have to learn something new anyway... it might as well be something that works instead of this steaming heap of *bleep*.

[removed per Community Guidelines]

WOW what a fail, this is juvenile development. Been doing this for 30 years and cant work out how to add a machine to a list. And how about having to add device to join this blog when the same device has been running TV for years. Get your act together, turn this new garbage off until you get it functioning. Whoever developed this has never done support. Leaving if you don't wake up!!

Point of view of the PC sharing its screen

Before last week's update

It was easy: you could ask the remote person to start TeamViewer and without any clicks, the first thing they'd see in the main single window was the connection status (green dot / "Ready to connect"), the PC TeamViewer ID and the password.

That can be done over the phone in less than 1 minute. Virtual no IT literacy required either.

With the new TeamViewer Remote!

• They need to click on "Join a session" ("what does that mean?")
• Then "Connect to a TeamViewer ID"

Why "to" a TeamViewer ID? The remote party is going to connect into this PC, not the other way around.

Point of view of the person viewing/controlling a remote PC

Before last week's update

Type the remote TeamViewer ID, click on connect, wait for the authentication prompt and type in the password. Quick and easy.

With the new TeamViewer Remote!

We have to sign in (fair enough, I'm talking as a paying customer anyway, so I've had to do that for years). Then, we need to go into "Remote Sessions."

First thing I try:

• Create a session
• I'm not particularly interested in the session code (and for example, there's no one in front of the PC I'm trying to connect to, but I have its TeamViewer ID and permanent password).
• I try connect to a TeamViewer ID, but if it doesn't work, if I've made a typo on the ID or even closed the "Connect with ID" box without actually starting the connection, then the session stays visibly active, without any way to know what remote party it was for.

There's absolutely no indication in the sessions list whether it's someone sharing their screen with me, or me sharing with them, or which PC is it: this is actually essential information.

Conclusions

TeamViewer's strength used to be its simplicity. That was its core strength.

It looks like the new TeamViewer version has lost its way.

Please at least revert to showing the TeamViewer ID / password as the first thing that shows up on the PC that is to be shared.

Also, please sort out this session management, it doesn't make sense.

Saying "Connect in an instant with easy-to-use Session Links" seems to assume that people sharing their PC have access to e-mail (or a way to receive such a link on a PC). Often, that's not the case: either they don't have an e-mail address (one they can access that PC) or also often they ask for your help precisely because they can't check their e-mail.

I realise there's an element of users objecting to change in general, but the new UI is certainly not easy as you seem to claim... All this makes you think of looking for alternatives.

As far as I can tell, users of PCs you're connecting into don't need to create a account (even with the new version).

All they need to do is to click on "Join a session" and enter a Session Code or click on "Connect to a TeamViewer ID" (which doesn't quite make sense, since it will actually display their PC's ID.)

You're right, the fact that this is not obvious is a problem in itself. (As I mentioned in this other post, the new UI is generally more complex unfortunately.)

I was just commenting on the need to create the account, otherwise I agree with you.

It seems that we have similar use cases: cases that worked much better with the previous UI (and cases which the TeamViewer team has visibly not taken into account).