Just watched a Fortune 500 client struggle with Microsoft and their build partners to create a global enterprise CMS-driven website. 6-7 months in it turned out Sharepoint was totally incapable of delivering on many common object-oriented, tag-driven, rules-based dynamic web mamangement syste. $100,000s totally wasted. Adobe CQ5 could do almost all of it out of the box with configuration, not development required. Sharepoint also could not deliver on the desired faceted search.
Over the years I have found that Sharepoint is much less capable and flexible than Microsoft or their build partners claim. My advice? Run (Hell, sprint!) away from Sharepoint for something more capable. (Like Sitecore for .NET or Adobe CQ5 for Java).
Specifically Sharepoint could not
- handle multiple instantiations of a kernal "standard" site to support multiple countries and mutiple business units
- faceted search
- sharing of content across instances
- complex taxonomies and tagging
This was with Microsoft's biggest build partner and supposed Sharepoint experts to boot.
It was Sharepoint 2010.
If you have a globe-spanning company with a multitude of business units offering a wide offering of products and services you really need an extremely flexible system -- preferably one that is object-oriented from the ground up using tagging and multiple taxonomies. That is not Sharepoint. The best solution I've seen so far is Adobe (nee Day) CQ5. You can describe an object by tag values with the object connected to branches of more than one taxonomic tree. Try to do that in Sharepoint.
With users using search as their default reserach method (and bearing Pirolli'sapplication of Charnov's Minimal Value Theorem) to how users find information a faceted search system starts to look like a valid option as the main navigation. Again not Sharepoint's strong suite.
Despite MS PR Sharepoint is best used for internal document management. It is not designed to be highly flexible, nimble or freindly. Sharepoint may be OK for an Intranet or simple website. Sharepoint also has a strong positive in the huge number of pre-existing plug-in modules and a sizeable number of developers/partners supporting it. Finally, Sharepoint is natively supportive of a .NET infrastructure which is very popular with enterprise level IT folks.
CQ5 for example is Java-based. It can work in a .NET world but not as a native.
Sharepoint 2010 is not a bad product, but MS and its partners oversell it like crazy for very inappropriate projects. 2010 has also decoupled Sharepoint the engine from thee front end. This allows you to use an alternative publishing system -- either off the shelf or purpose built.
If you need to share content between instances, update content across instances from a central "master" source or need powerful rules-based dynamic web publishing I would say look elsewhere -- that's not Sharepoint's gig.
PLEASE NOTE THESE ARE MY PERSONAL OPINIONS BASED ON MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF MY EMPLOYER
Which changes would you suggest to the product that would make users less dependent on product consultants?