SharePoint and Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) compete in the enterprise content management category. SharePoint seems to have the upper hand with its seamless integration with Microsoft Office and robust collaboration features, but AEM holds strengths in digital asset management and modular architecture.
Features: SharePoint offers strong collaboration features like alerts, co-authoring, and version history. Its integration with Microsoft Office enhances document sharing and management. Meanwhile, AEM excels in digital asset management, campaign management, and has e-commerce capabilities, boasting a modular architecture for efficient web content management.
Room for Improvement: SharePoint could benefit from enhancements in real-time co-authoring, permissions setup, and search functionality. AEM needs improvement in reducing its high learning curve, better integration with non-Adobe products, and addressing its expensive pricing. Its client-side rendering and cloud deployment pipeline could also be refined.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both SharePoint and AEM support public, private cloud, and on-premises deployments. SharePoint is notable for its versatile deployment across Microsoft's cloud infrastructure with strong hybrid support. AEM requires complex setup due to its intensive cloud service. SharePoint benefits from extensive third-party community support, whereas AEM relies more on Adobe's official channels for technical support, which can sometimes be challenging.
Pricing and ROI: SharePoint offers competitive pricing, especially when bundled with Microsoft Office 365, which is attractive for organizations needing wide functionality. It provides ROI through efficient document and process management. AEM has a high initial cost suitable for large enterprises needing strong digital content management and detailed analytics. AEM's ROI is long-term, achieved through managing large-scale web content efficiently.
They are attentive to big companies but tend to be negligent towards mid-sized companies.
There are Adobe engineers, sales representatives, and engineers assigned to Sephora North America.
They are always supportive.
There is a lack of detailed and timely responses, and support is not always transparent with the solutions.
The quality of Microsoft's technical support is very high.
It's also difficult sometimes to get the right information because we speak at first to a generalist and they have to go to a specialist.
You cannot simply add more servers without purchasing the license.
The scalability of Adobe Experience Manager is pretty good because we have so many engineers that are knowledgeable about and have experience in altering the Adobe Experience Manager system.
Making it easy to scale from a load-balancing and infrastructure perspective.
SharePoint is massively scalable and I would rate it as 8.5 out of ten.
SharePoint allows multiple teams to work at the same time, making it adaptable for large data volumes.
Since they are enterprise and have significant digital business coming through the digital medium, the stability of the product is very important.
The stability of SharePoint is high; it is quite stable and resilient.
Everything runs smoothly, and I have no problems with its stability.
SharePoint is a stable product.
Technical support could be improved, especially for smaller companies.
There is a feature missing where if content is created on the UAT environment and needs to be transferred or synced to the production environment, there is no direct way of doing the sync.
Many people complain about the price as it's one of the most expensive tools.
Microsoft forces users to upgrade their license to access proper auditing information, which is essential and should be included in any license.
The rights management aspect can be particularly challenging, which may affect the overall user-friendliness of the product.
Expansion of scalability is needed, specifically the threshold limits for site items should be increased beyond the current 5,000 items.
For large enterprises, the cost is often comparable with other major CMSs.
Adobe Experience Manager is expensive compared to competitors.
Unlike Drupal, all necessary applications are included in the Microsoft license, making it cost-effective.
Microsoft offers bundled pricing for Office, SharePoint, and Exchange, making it cost-effective.
Enterprise licensing is generally cost-effective compared to individual purchases.
Feature-wise, I believe the dispatcher module is the best aspect of Adobe Experience Manager.
The integration of customer behavior and website setup is impressive.
Additionally, SharePoint acts as a version control system, allowing easy recovery of past document versions.
Its rights management capabilities and ability to restrict access to certain people are also very useful.
The most valuable feature of SharePoint is the ability to collaborate on documents without having multiple versions.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| SharePoint | 15.1% |
| Adobe Experience Manager | 3.2% |
| Other | 81.7% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 5 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 14 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 79 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 37 |
| Large Enterprise | 80 |
Adobe Communique 5 (Adobe CQ5), currently manifested as Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), is a web-based content management system which is developed to help businesses in offering high-end digital experience to their customers.
SharePoint is a Microsoft-based platform for building web applications. It covers a widerange of capabilities and while it is appropriate for experienced webdevelopers, even non-technical minded users can easily navigate through thesystem and execute functions such as collaborating data, managing documents andfiles, creating websites, managing social networking solutions, and automatingworkflow.
Major areas that SharePoint deals with are websites,communities, content, search, insights, and composites. The purpose is to give usersthe ability to create or develop these key business components on their owneven without technical knowledge of, for example, how to build a website or howto integrate coding. Configuring SharePoint into a business's system is meantto cut out all of the complicated steps, and pave the way for easierimplementation all around.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
