Adobe Experience Manager vs Microsoft Office SharePoint Server comparison

"I like the native applications such as Adobe Target, Adobe Analytics, and Adobe Experience Platform. Because of these, it's very easy to connect and obtain reports on how my website is doing, how many have visited it, how frequently, etc. The multiple publisher concept is one of the best parts of this solution."

"I like the profiling and segmentation."

"The integration of customer behavior and website setup is impressive."

"Over the past two to three years, the organization has grown rapidly with Adobe Experience Manager as a best and supportive tool."

"It is easy to learn. You don't need to be an advanced Java developer."

"It's a complete package. You don't need to look elsewhere for digital marketing."

"Adobe Experience Manager offers several best features, including user-friendliness and a more secure platform than any other content management systems I have worked with."

"If you want to use content in a mobile application and you want the content in some other application, you can simply expose it from the CMS to different clients or different systems. It's easy. On top of that, the technology underlying AEM is open-source and is very powerful like Apache Sling and JCR."

"The software is friendly to use for mixing data and analyzing it."

"It is a decent tool for collaboration, especially if you are already using other Office products."

"The level of stability is good."

"What I appreciate most about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is how it centralizes information and collaboration in one place."

"I believe the control and the restrictions, accesses that we can have once we decide to share any document through Microsoft Office SharePoint Server, are the most beneficial aspects for me."

"The ability to work through a web browser without requiring installation on devices is particularly beneficial."

"Microsoft Office SharePoint Server helps with return on investment as it saves a lot of time and helps clients improve their processes."

"Ability to collaborate with others in one location."

"In comparison to other CMS products, Adobe Experience Manager is missing some capabilities such as proper versioning or a better versioning system and backend connectivity. If something is deleted in AEM, the user cannot recover it. You have to call technical support, and they will need to recover the whole instance. So, it's really difficult. For example, if you delete a page, you cannot recover it. There should be an option to recover it. In AEM, you have to go to the previous state of the instance itself or the virtual machine, and you have to restore everything, which is not good."

"The latest trend is to render everything in the client-side framework. For example, SPA or single page application. This is a feature that needs improvement. The cloud deployment pipeline needs to be improved as well."

"A little bit of background knowledge of coding and website structure is required."

"Adobe's technical support is so-so."

"The licenses are very expensive."

"I assigned a rating of eight because there are certain limitations we must consider, and there are restrictions in Adobe Experience Manager that we cannot resolve."

"The licensing model is opaque, and technical support could be improved, especially for smaller companies."

"Adobe Experience Manager is not so simple to use, so others should have some experience with similar programs."

"Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is more accessible for the average user, but it lacks certain features that more advanced users would look for, making it seem unnecessarily complicated to do simple things or things one expects to be simple."

"The product is behind in development and lacks some features."

"Regarding the setup for Microsoft Office SharePoint Server, I have to rate it lower, maybe a seven out of 10, as it is a little bit more complex and not so easy to use in some use cases."

"The search feature needs improvement. I can never find the information I need when I use it."

"The GUI is outdated."

"Technical support could be improved. They are not fast enough, especially when we'll go deeper in the product itself. More complex issues make it very tough to find someone that can help you."

"This solution is not very stable. It is useful to arrange data but it's not the best for big data. Sometimes we have issues with our reports as a result."

"The ability to preview files in different formats should be expanded to include formats such as embedded postscript (EPS), AutoCAD, and Adobe Acrobat PDF."

"There's a free trial for one month for Adobe Experience Manager, which you can use for learning purposes, then, after the trial period, you'll need to purchase the license. Adobe offers a few plans for Adobe Experience Manager, but I'm unaware of how much my company is paying."

"It's really costly."

"Users have to pay a yearly licensing fee to use the solution, which is highly-priced."

"It's a costly solution. I would rate the price at two out of five on a scale from one to five, where one is the most expensive and five is the most competitive."

"One of the reasons why we don't recommend the cloud version of SharePoint is the cost. With the on premise version, you pay for the license once. For the cloud version, there is a recurring fee. It is very expensive. They expect everyone to pay $20 or $30 per user per month."

"There are some aggressive discounts offered by Microsoft for organizations that are not for profit, which we are, and it makes it quite attractive to consider."

"Pricing plans may be flexible depending on volume usage and your corporate relationship with Microsoft."

"It can be expensive for on-premises deployments, especially when you have to support SQL Server as your backend database. That's where the cost comes into play. SQL Server has its own licensing, which Microsoft keeps on changing. Therefore, it can become costly. In the earlier versions of SharePoint, version 2007 or 2010, they had an express version where the SQL Server licensing was free. It wasn't like a full-blown SharePoint. It was only a slimmed-down version. It used to be whatever your hardware costs. You would install the free software and work with it, but you were very limited in what you could do in SharePoint. If you wanted the SharePoint Enterprise Server with all the bells and whistles, then you had to pay more to get the SQL Server license based on the number of users or servers. The subscription model is different for cloud deployments. Licensing is per user and per month. The cost also depends on the storage required. If you have a lot of sites or documents, then you need to expand it based on your needs."