Microsoft Office SharePoint Server vs OpenText Vibe comparison

"The level of stability is good."

"From my partner perspective, the best advantages of Microsoft Office SharePoint Server are that it's easy to use, and we can easily communicate, share documents, and assign permissions to specific people."

"The integration with security tools in Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is one of the significant pluses since it alerts the IT team if anyone tries to redirect an email, which is illegal for us."

"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the fact that it doesn't require coding. You just need to configure it. You don't need to code before getting something running. It makes it very fast."

"The most valuable feature of the product is that it's robust and you can access many features from Microsoft, such as Exchange, through SharePoint."

"The feature that I value the most about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is the ability to have multiple persons in a file at the same time, which was not possible when we started using computers."

"The solution's most valuable aspects are its collaboration capabilities, its communications site and the innovation within the product itself."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Communication Site."

"HTML and JSP elements are the most valuable features."

"It's relatively easy to create folders or workspaces."

"We were able to centralize all customer data: files, discussions and technical notes."

"Our end users find great value in building team workspaces to collaborate not only with internal employees, but with third-party consultants and customers as required."

"The features that I found most useful were being able to see who made changes to a document, where the document was in the chain of command, and being able to leave comments to make the process more collaborative."

"There were no stability issues; it just works."

"What I like most about this solution, is the fact that I can access it anywhere and customize it to my needs."

"The solution needs to have more flexibility. The classic version had more flexibility, however, the modern version has many more limitations."

"The permission management features need improvement."

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

"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."

"The product could be improved by accommodating different technologies, particularly integration."

"Probably because I may not have extensively used the advanced search, the search option can sometimes get a little difficult to find out what exactly you're looking for."

"The workflow is very rudimentary."

"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 end user experience could be improved; some functions are a little too complicated for the average user."

"While we were working on implementing this product, the entire system crashed and we had to reinstall it from a previous version."

"You have to press the BACK button at least three times till it will go back to the previous page. This is something that must be improved."

"One thing that really needs to improve, is opening files or folders. It takes much longer than when you are getting it to Windows Explorer on the desktop."

"The user interface can be changed to 'look' more like a Microsoft one since this will help market the product more."

"The speed of opening files is too slow and should be increased."

"The following issues need some attention: better integration with MS Office suite, more flexibility in customizing the colors and themes, custom forms and workflows are powerful, but the interface needs revamping to be easier to work with."

"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."