RAUM vs. Microsoft Teams:
When the Hub Isn’t Enough
—Spatial Collaboration
vs.
When should you switch?
Microsoft Teams is the central hub for chat, calls, and files in millions of organizations. RAUM is the alternative for teams that feel the next step in collaboration isn’t “another tab” but a shared place. If you want complex content to be experienced in space and work to have lasting context, RAUM complements or replaces the classic hub.
Why teams look for a complement to Microsoft Teams
Teams reliably covers chat, video, and documents—and for many organizations it’s already paid for. That’s exactly where the limits show:
- The 2D paradigm: Everything stays on screens and in lists. Complex relationships, strategies, or 3D content are “clicked through” in calls instead of being walked through together.
- No lasting work place: After the meeting, context disappears into chats, notes, and shared files. Next time, everything has to be re-explained and re-framed.
- Meeting fatigue despite Copilot: Even with AI summaries, the experience stays: tiles, speaking lists, shared screen. The feeling of really being in the same “place” is missing.
The result: Organizations look for a complement or alternative to Teams once they want to not only coordinate collaboration but make it spatially tangible and lastingly anchored.
The fundamental difference: Hub vs. space
Teams connects people and content—RAUM creates the place where they meet.
- Microsoft Teams (The hub) Chat, calls, files, and apps in one surface. The logic is channels, tabs, meetings. Optimized for information flow and alignment.
- RAUM (The workspace): A persistent 3D space where content stays, relates to each other in space, and is “entered” and developed together by everyone. Optimized for co-presence and context-rich collaboration.
Feature comparison: RAUM vs. Microsoft Teams
| Aspect | Microsoft Teams (hub) | RAUM (workspace) |
|---|---|---|
| Core logic | Chat, video, files, apps | Persistent 3D workspace |
| Collaboration | Channel- and meeting-centered | Space- and object-centered |
| Persistence | Chats, files, notes | Lasting spatial structure |
| Presence | Video tiles, avatars (Mesh) | Full co-presence in 3D |
| 3D / immersion | Optional (Mesh in Teams) | Core to the experience |
| Strength | Flexibility, AI, consolidation | Context, experience, shared place |
When Microsoft Teams remains the right choice
Teams stays the base for day-to-day communication, calendar, files, and Office integration. For alignment, status updates, and document-driven collaboration in the Microsoft cosmos, Teams is efficient and often already in use.
Why RAUM complements or replaces Teams (where space matters)
RAUM addresses the gap between “we have everything in Teams” and “we want to experience and develop it together.”
1. Context that stays
In RAUM, the state of a project stays visible in the space. At the next meeting you don’t have to re-explain where each topic stands—the space carries the context. That lightens meetings and reduces repetition.
2. Real spatial presence
Instead of only tiles and shared screen, teams in RAUM get a clear sense of “we’re in the same place.” That strengthens connection, focus, and decision quality—especially for distributed and hybrid teams.
3. Independence from the ecosystem
RAUM isn’t tied to a single vendor. If you work across platforms, collaborate with partners outside M365, or want long-term sovereignty, RAUM offers a spatial collaboration layer without vendor lock-in.
Conclusion: From hub to place
RAUM is the alternative or complement to Microsoft Teams for everyone who wants to anchor collaboration not only in chat and calls but in a shared, persistent space. If you want to coordinate and document, use Teams. If you want to think, experience, and work in context together over time, use RAUM.
The spatial alternative to Teams—when the hub isn’t enough.