Microsoft Office SharePoint Server vs Oracle Beehive comparison

"The most valuable feature is that it is very usable. I can navigate it, I can have a media call, I can have a call with my project team, so we can chat with every team kind of like WhatsApp. Any time there are projects or other things, we can chat in a secure way. It's automation-specific secure."

"Ability to collaborate with others in one location."

"The implementation and configuring of the resolution are very easy in the online version."

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

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

"The support from Microsoft is very quick and they are very proactive."

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

"This solution has automated protection from downtime. High-availability is built into every component, and the backups are completely automated."

"We have really high level of services, performance, availability, and it is stable. Everything works together really well."

"Workflows could be simplified."

"Many of our customers would like to see an OCR feature, so it would be very good to have this in a future release."

"I would like to see more Agile techniques and seamless integration with other applications."

"The solution needs to be more collaborative. I believe they are just coming up with the themes for this right now."

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

"The user interface needs improvement because there is a lot of stuff in there. I use five to eight navigation buttons. It should be more user-friendly. Frequently used menu items should be arranged in a proper way. That would be helpful."

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

"The areas around security, such as protection, need to be included."

"The price of licenses is high and should be improved."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."