SharePoint Reviews

Our primary use cases are for 

• Central repository for document integrated with a core application.
• The integration through web service with Oracle ERP and Oracle CCB 
• In addition, we use SharePoint two build a library for different projects for collaboration and sharing propose.

It has improved my organization in the following ways:

• Gave us the ability to integrate with other systems that need a lot of customization.
• Offers alignment between user permissions in SharePoint and other systems is not exist.

The most valuable features are collaboration and sharing.

• Workflow engine
• Video streaming and huge file retrieving and uploading
• It does not support video streaming and huge file retrieving and uploading
• The workflow engine cannot support business needs.

I have used SharePoint for six years.

It's not expensive.

We did evaluate other options.

We use this solution for intranet, extranet, web site, content management, collaboration, integrations, eCommerce, inventory, portfolio, project, and process management.

This solution has given us better access, coordination, collaboration, and visibility. It is an enterprise system for many functions instead of multiple systems to support. Interactive intranet instead of static web pages, integration of other systems to include GIS. We also have better search capability. 

The most valuable features are the Integrations, web site, and search.

The areas of this solution that need improvement are the relationships between lists, cross-site web parts, and page-building tools.

I have been consulting with this solution, combined with SQL server, since 2005. The majority of my consulting at that time changed from Active Directory and C++ to SQL Server and SharePoint.

This solution is a workflow operating system with many metadata services. Information is taken and automatically triggers actions. The specific action is based on the information itself, which is used to calculate a complex answer that results in the action.

I would like a simpler, more cost-effective solution for connecting data sources with workflows and BI tools, or data mining tools. There are different tools for data mining and for data evaluation, but you have to be a skilled programmer to tie them together. There is no simple and low-cost method to do this, provided that development time is a cost factor.

There are some automatic solutions for this task, such as Team Foundation Server, which is built on SharePoint. These tools can learn specific errors that are being made, using data mining techniques, and they are able to target these errors for correction. Having this capability built in, and customizable for the customer would be of great interest.

I would like to see support for Visual Studio to connect to SharePoint and have a wizard to connect data processes to iHubs, like an analysis server or data mining model, to an output, and to have a smart way of creating workflows. Microsoft will tell you that they already have that for SharePoint online, it's called "Flow", but it is not customer compatible.

It is stable after the hotfixes, or service pack has been applied. This has been the case for each release since 2003. If you take the release directly to the customer then it is almost always a big mess for them during implementation.

This solution is extremely scalable. It is a highly performance-optimized web service that you just have to install correctly and then add the machine to the farm with the proper permissions. That is one of the biggest strengths of SharePoint.

Technical support is extremely well developed with Microsoft. It's just that you have to pay for it, so it is not for someone without Software Assurance.

The setup of this solution is complex. There are SharePoint deployment architecture scenarios, and sometimes the C-level deciders underestimate the complexity of it. You have to know SharePoint very well.

For this type of solution, it is not wise to buy it without Software Assurance. It depends on the customer, but most are using an agreement that covers four to ten free incidents per year. You really need that, and it's well-invested money.

When comparing this solution to other workflow operating systems like Oracle or BP Logix, I give this solution a ten out of ten.

My advice for anyone implementing this solution is to first try everything that you want to do in a virtual environment, with people who know how SharePoint is programmed. You need to understand the psychology of business users because most of them omit essential steps when they are creating the business process model. They are used to doing things in their head, but the machine is not aware of everything that they know so some steps are missed.

Ideally, you want to buy a bunch of post-it notes and test your processes manually, by playing with different scenarios. You have to tune the business processes. I have seen projects fail because the debug phase of the business process design was not thorough.

This solution is useful for optimizing usual business processes, like writing an invoice. For any organization with more than one person in it, if they are trying to organize things to let people in the company know what others are doing, then this solution is good for them.

While this workflow operating system is better than others on the market, it is uncomfortable and expensive to really implement what you need. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have a customized solution called TeamCenter. The technology behind it is SharePoint.

The use case is to distribute project mandates among team members, track and collaborate on the work that has been done. It creates the work breakdown, and assigns tasks, manages the workflow accordingly. We are able to check what is being done, who is been handling it, and where the workflow is at right now. It eases control, messaging, and provides a common view where we are at.

Now that this system has been put in place, we have email integration and a lot of work which we were doing manually is now done by Teamcentral, thanks to SharePoint, thanks to Microsoft.

The workflow feature is valuable because it enables us to cascade responsibilities. It cyclically keeps tabs on work and to what extent it has progressed, where it is stuck. That feature is really very helpful.

There is always room for improvement. Workflow is something that can become more intelligent. I can't say to what extent intelligence can added, but I think there is always a scope for making it more intelligent.

It's going to last until Microsoft revokes the license on which it is built.

Since scale is not challenging me right now, I haven't really paid attention to its scalability. We have 12 users on it. Their roles are primarily deployment, resource management, and fulfilling the technical mandates people are working on.

We did not have a previous solution, other than mail-messaging and Excel.

The initial setup was straightforward for sure. I didn't see any complexity in it. The implementation took about three-and-a-half months.

We used a consultant. He was technical enough to use the plug-ins and integrators that were required. He was a specialist.

The pricing works for us.

Workflow is helpful in the allocation of tasks in any close-knit teams, teams which are not sized beyond 20 to 25 at the most. If the workflow can be made more intelligent, adding value to the information rather than just pinging and cascading and shooting of alerts, that can really help with value-add and to save time.

There was one techy who designed and implemented this. Currently he continues looking at what is required, but in terms of continued support I don't have any staff on it. When any fixes are required, he handles them remotely. We don't have anyone on staff to manage it.

We expect the scale to go up and more business to pour in so we expect the number of users is going to increase. We would definitely be looking at a little more intelligent implementation of workflows so that we've got better control and better delegation of mandates.

I would rate it at seven out of ten. It works for me. I haven't seen anything parallel.

For intranet and file sharing and internal communications.

Yes, especially reducing the print paper and having a very quick response, and reducing the time between department and people.

Sharing and workflow.

Special implementation and development should be easy.

Stability is OK.

Scalability is OK.

Partner was not good. They did not have so much experience.

FileNet and Documentum.

Very hard.

Vendor and partner.

I did not measure, but it is useful.

Pricing is very high.

No.

No.

It is used to support Intranet. It has good content handling and MS Office integration, but poor user experience.

It has allowed documentation control and distribution through the organization, managed easily from the AD.

• The lists handling is perfect, and any kind of content linked to them very easy to publish.
• Creation of communities is very straightforward.

The user experience is very poor. Configuration for new aspect means usually buying add-ons or a very high level of customization.

• Shared document repository and communication tool for projects and teams
• I love SharePoint lists; they are pretty flexible and easy to create and export data from. 
• You can also restrict the view to customize to specific audiences. 
• It is also easy to create subsites, and security can be applied to individual pages.

It is a good tool that makes managing projects and teams much easier. All documents and calendars are in one central location.

• SharePoint lists
• Calendar
• Subsites
• Security
• Survey
• It is easy to administer as a business user.

The UI could be more flexible out of the box. With coding, you can customize the look and feel to your heart's content, but configuration without coding is limited.