We performed a comparison between Kiteworks and Microsoft Office SharePoint Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Dropbox, Box, Microsoft and others in Content Collaboration Platforms."The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."
"The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty."
"I like Kiteworks or Accellion because it's continuously upgraded. I also know that it probably works with a lot of clients."
"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."
"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."
"The top two features are the two-factor authentication, which is pretty good. It's easily understood by the users. And their API is rather robust. We have numerous integrations that work off the API."
"We could see whether the customer with whom we shared a file had downloaded it, which was not available with GitHub."
"We can see when people are sending things. We can definitely see who is sending to whom. From the administrative logs, we can see who is sending to an outside entity, and those logs are retained for quite a while."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Communication Site."
"The support from Microsoft is very quick and they are very proactive."
"The solution's most valuable aspects are its collaboration capabilities, its communications site and the innovation within the product itself."
"It's a very robust product."
"Ability to collaborate with others in one location."
"The collaboration, the ability for multiple users to work on a single document."
"The forms aspect of the solution, for example, the creation of surveys, is its most valuable aspect."
"The level of stability is good."
"In my experience, their technical support can be a little slow."
"I would like to see immediate releases of fixes because now it takes at least a week. If that time span can be reduced to one day or two days, that would be very helpful for users so that things are sorted and transactions work smoothly."
"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."
"File location could be improved."
"There are always issues when there are bugs or upgrades. The challenge with upgrading is getting more storage from the customer. Every time we have a new version, it requires additional storage. This means that the customer would need to procure more storage for their server, which they don't like because it means additional cost to them. So, I think my request would be that the version upgrades don't require any significant storage requirement."
"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."
"The one feature, which I have also requested directly to Kiteworks, is to have a scheduled upgrade function. Currently, one of my engineers logs in after hours for the upgrade. We're a hospital, and we're 24/7, but the primary users are seven to five. So, we log in the early evening just to push a button to tell it to do the update. It would be nice if that could be very easily scheduled."
"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."
"The solution is like a CRM, so the initial setup is complex. It takes a few days to deploy the solution and the length of time depends on how large the company's topology is and what the client's demands are."
"Many of our customers would like to see an OCR feature, so it would be very good to have this in a future release."
"Workflows could be simplified."
"I think these tools do a pretty good job. There is only one area of improvement. Maybe Microsoft can invest a little bit more into the ease at which integration can be done with other third party applications."
"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."
"I would like to see the integration with Teams reinforced."
"The search feature needs improvement. I can never find the information I need when I use it."
"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."
More Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Kiteworks is ranked 10th in Content Collaboration Platforms with 12 reviews while Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is ranked 11th in Content Collaboration Platforms. Kiteworks is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Kiteworks writes "A unified, secure way to share sensitive content, with no file size limitations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Office SharePoint Server writes "Stable, integrates well with Teams, and has flexible and helpful support". Kiteworks is most compared with Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, MOVEit, Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, SharePoint and JSCAPE by Redwood, whereas Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is most compared with Amazon WorkDocs, Datto Workplace, FileCloud, HCL Connections and CTERA Drive.
See our list of best Content Collaboration Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Content Collaboration Platforms 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.
