Side-by-side comparison · 24 data points
| ScreenMeet for Support | Hide Ticket Fields | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | ScreenMeet for Support | Hide Ticket Fields |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.0 ★ | ★ 5.0 ★ |
| Total reviews | 10 | ★ 865 |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free to install | Free |
Based on the data on this page, Hide Ticket Fields is the stronger choice for most Zendesk Marketplace support teams — 5.0★ vs ScreenMeet for Support's 4.0★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
Pricing entry tiers: ScreenMeet for Support at Free to install, Hide Ticket Fields at Free. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (seats, usage volume, integrations) varies.
Hide Ticket Fields has the larger user base (865 reviews vs 10), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. ScreenMeet for Support's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage support teams who need fast install and low risk should default to Hide Ticket Fields; mid-market and enterprise support teams with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — ScreenMeet for Support's 10-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Hide Ticket Fields's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Zendesk Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: ScreenMeet for Support audit • Hide Ticket Fields audit
| Keyword | ScreenMeet for Support | Hide Ticket Fields |
|---|---|---|
| modern remote support | #2 | Not ranked |
No tracked changes.
Both ScreenMeet for Support and Hide Ticket Fields offer paid plans only. ScreenMeet for Support starts at Free to install; Hide Ticket Fields starts at Free. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
Hide Ticket Fields has the higher average rating (5.0★ from 865 reviews) compared to ScreenMeet for Support (4.0★ from 10 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Hide Ticket Fields holds the higher average rating (5.0★ vs 4.0★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Zendesk Marketplace. Hide Ticket Fields has the deeper published review base (865 vs 10), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
ScreenMeet for Support typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (10 reviews). Hide Ticket Fields typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (865 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. ScreenMeet for Support and Hide Ticket Fields both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from ScreenMeet for Support" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.