SharePoint Reviews

Our primary use is document sharing.

It has improve our organization by speeding up document sharing.

Its most valuable feature is the document library.

Replication needs improvement.

• Documents storage
• Collaboration features (lists, discussion boards)
• Surveys
• .NET extensibility
• Workflows

Mostly, because it facilitates collaboration and the ability to create custom workflows.

For the past few years, we've been mapping some of our manual procedures into SharePoint, through the use of lists, workflows, centralized documents, etc. This has allowed our organization to start moving away from manual and non-standard practices, to more repeatable procedures.

Flexibility and extensibility, above everything, could be improved. Extending the functionality of SharePoint is painful, at the bare minimum. Complex .NET coding, testing, debugging is necessary to extend the native functionalities. Even with the new "apps" concept in SharePoint 2013, the difficulties in expanding it are present.

I’ve been using SharePoint for the last three years.

We have had difficulty with stability. The configuration and administration of SharePoint is complex. This resulted in incidents when changes to other products were made, like Active Directory or Exchange. Time consuming maintenance tasks are necessary, otherwise your SharePoint instance will become unstable.

We have had scalability issues. I cannot speak about horizontal scalability, but the mapping of environments (Dev, QA, Production) is difficult. There's no logical segmentation that allows the creation of several environments to facilitate development and testing tasks. Additional instances of SharePoint are necessary.

Support is deficient. We depend on local vendors to get access to support and most of the issues we presented took more time to resolve that we wanted. It is not a platform for running business-critical applications.

We did not have a previous solution.

Initial setup was complex. The multi-step installation process is complex and has too many dependencies on other Microsoft products, such as Exchange and SQL Server.

I cannot speak about this as our product comes in an MSDN package.

Unfortunately there were no alternatives; I didn't choose this product.

Look for other options from different providers.

The most valuable features of this product are: multiple site collections, list libraries, the content and document library, and custom development & integration.

Multiple site and subsites are created for around 10 subsidiaries of the main company which has a uniform portal along with subsidiary specific contents and documents.

Discussion forum, content library, document library, task calendar, job postings, integration with ticketing tool, etc. are features which are general as well as specific to each subsidiary and built by using SharePoint 2013.

We created a uniform portal for multiple subsidiaries of the company; a single place where employees can find all related documents, references and can raise requests to another application via this portal.

Areas with room for improvement:

• A more responsive UI: There is a set of user groups who want to use this application in their mobile devices. If SharePoint provides a responsive UI by default, then no extra efforts are needed to integrate the existing UI with a more responsive UI.
• The deployment process on multiple servers adds redundant work, mainly for configurations and creating site collections: Same-application deployment requires initial setup to be repeated for any new environment. For example, the very first time we need to set up each environment, we need to create the site collections and so on, and then deploy WSP packages.

No issues have been encountered in terms of stability.

I have not got a chance to make use of technical support for any issues.

Initial setup was complex for IT resources with a non-SharePoint background.

License cost is slightly higher so it is suggestible to derive license cost based on relevant features.

We did not evaluate any other options.

Using this product, one can benefit from OOB features in regards to content and document management. It provides a single platform where multiple applications can be integrated under one roof.

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.

To initially set up as part of a records management initiative. The company I was working for needed to better track and support how and where documents are located. 

While there were plenty of out-of-the-box solutions for records management projects, this probably under-utilized aspect of SharePoint can help better track documents and retention. 

Ease of implementation. Certainly, IT needs to give appropriate access to a sandbox, but learning is easy and quick.

Microsoft seems to always be making changes. Sometimes you will get a message saying some aspect of what they deliver is being discontinued and often you simply never had time to explore what it had to offer in the first place. 

I use this solution for storing documents. It is a single sign-on with the identity system and so it will sign me on and I will upload, download some document, and share it with my colleagues at work.

It has helped us with storing all the documents, which means that people are not going to intervene. There is a way of extracting knowledge within documentation and tracking it. There are knowledge assets for where documentation is stored, indexed, and searchable through SharePoint. I think this represents the collective knowledge, which is highly valuable.

Search can be improved a lot because we are always trying to compare it with Google Search. Beyond that, it would be helpful to tag the documents.

It is stable.

I was not personally involved with the setup. My IT team did this.

When I am choosing a product, I think of the quality of service, economy of sale, licensing, implementation, the skill set of documentation, SaaS availability, and skill set. These are the constellations in mind when I'm choosing a product.

I think SharePoint can definitely look at taking it to the next level of customer experience. It's not about how jazzy it looks and so on but it's more of how intuitive it is and how it can basically enable a user-friendly experience. When downloading a document, ask yourself how can you enable it? How can you enable some kind of a decision tree, and how can you have some kind of a bot in there which can do some assistance for the customer who was supposedly struggling to find the document, or is not able to find what to search. The bot can intervene and help the user with some alternate keywords and to clearly define what the user is looking for. Those kinds of things should be the next addition to SharePoint.