SharePoint Reviews

Everyone knows SharePoint. It is very common.

The most valuable facet of SharePoint is the content, the ideas, all the information, all in one content management system. But I don't think we have explored or used 100 percent of the capabilities of SharePoint.

They need to integrate all the solutions, for example, Office 365, into SharePoint. The idea is to create a workplace for people in the company. There should be only one place - it could be Skype for Business, OneDrive - for the news, for internal information about the company, or new documents. This is the idea, to create an ecosystem for people in the company.

Stability is okay. The performance is great.

The scalability is not high. It's medium.

We have support with Microsoft, we pay for support for every year. The support is okay.

You need Microsoft or a partner involved for setup.

We are looking for increased functionality on SharePoint or to change to something else. We have a CapEx for content management and I'm looking for the best solution for my company.

The most important criterion in selecting a vendor is that the solution gives me value. It should be very easy to integrate with workflow or BPM. I'm looking for a partner and a solution that gives me value.

I have used SharePoint as an integrated solution with Team Foundation Server.

The most valuable features are the SharePoint lists and the documents feature.

SharePoint integrates well with the Team Foundation Server and provides collaboration features for team members on a TFS Team Project. This has helped developers and project stakeholders in the organization to collaborate better and share information in the form of documents/updates.

Migrating SharePoint sites can be a cumbersome process and it usually results in the incomplete migration of SharePoint sites and data.

I have used SharePoint for three years, mostly as an integrated solution with the Team Foundation Server.

The product is quite stable.

The product is scalable.

We were not using any other solution.

The setup and installation are straightforward. Microsoft provides a good installation wizard for the same.

I was not involved in the pricing and licensing activities.

As both the Team Foundation Server and SharePoint are Microsoft products, they can be easily integrated. Thus, we did not evaluate other options.

SharePoint works very well within a Microsoft ecosystem. Hence, SharePoint would be a good choice if the organization uses the Microsoft technology stack extensively.

The valuable features are:

• MS-Office integration
• Workflow and approval process
• Security

We use this solution as central repository for all the corporate information systems. It is a point of reference in our organization.

Administration is still very complex.

We have been using this solution since 2005.

I did not encounter any issues with stability.

I did not encounter any issues with scalability, although our installation is a small one and doesn't have that problem.

The solution is a strategic product for Microsoft, and the technical support is very good.

Prior to this solution, we used shared files provided by the operating system.

The installation was very complex. Since our initial implementation, that process has been improved dramatically.

We considered open source products like Alfresco. We decided to purchase a commercially supported product.

It is a complex product that should be implemented carefully. Take into account the organization’s details.

In our scenario, Team Portal was a really useful feature.

We used to keep all of our documentation on SharePoint. SharePoint's version control worked really well with our large range of documents.

Configuration and troubleshooting need improvement, especially regarding TFS integration.

I’ve used this for more than eight years as an integration with the Microsoft Team Foundation Server.

We had stability issues regarding the TFS integration.

We didn’t have any scalability issues.

In Brazil and India, I thought technical support was really poor. In my case, my tickets were transferred to international support. They weren’t able to help me.

We did not have a previous solution.

It was very easy to install, like most Microsoft products. I love Microsoft's way of keeping their setups very similar.

I don't have enough experience with SharePoint's pricing and licensing to give my opinion.

We didn’t look at alternatives. Integration with TFS was crucial to our teams.

I think they can look for free options in the case of small teams of five to ten members. Otherwise, this is an amazing option. I am very satisfied.

The most valuable features are the high number of ready-made snippets, easy basic process automation functionality, security model, and good integration with other Microsoft products.

Knowledge management has improved a lot.

Analytics and reporting is an area with room for improvement.

It should provide more complex-process automation out of the box.

We've been using it in production since early 2015 for both document management and as Project Server 2013.

We have spent some time reconfiguring the farm in order to overcome performance degradation.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

We haven't issued any tickets to Microsoft support because we have dedicated SharePoint admins.

We have used no other tool prior to SharePoint.

Installation and configuration were somewhat complex.

You can always start off with the free SharePoint Foundation version in order to evaluate the platform.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate any other options.

Look at the spec list and try to find out if (almost) all of the features you request are covered by SharePoint.

Collaboration & DMS are the most valuable features of the product, to me.

It is also easy to use and provides valuable integration options.

We are a service provider of SharePoint and SCOM to our clients. And we can see the change, how efficiently they are able to carry out their regular productivity works through SP, while the IT team is able to have control and adapt quickly with SCOM.

There are multiple areas with room for improvement:

1. Scanning engine driver
2. Mobile integration (just launched by MS, yet to be seen)
3. Stability

We recommend this product with the following two main points:

1. Cost of investment is quite low, while the ROI is quite high.
2. Plan a proper approach, and look for a capable team for implementation

Our primary use of SharePoint is document management and collaboration from our team. It is very important for us.

We can arrange all our documents on one platform and see the document's changes and edits. We can arrange all the document archives.

Office 365 integration is most valuable thing in SharePoint. It is so much easier to create documents. 

Using SharePoint is difficult. It will fully use your system resources. 

It is very expensive.

We use SharePoint as a document management solution.  It has allowed us to centralise and more efficiently manage our templates, letterheads and other company-branded elements.  Our Document Library is a central repository for our user manuals making it easy for consultants to access the right information for each implementation.  We also use SharePoint to manage our policies and procedures. 

SharePoint has streamlined our documentation management process by allowing us to automate several functions. The version control function has been particularly useful, helping us keep detailed records of changes to documentation. This has removed the risk of human error and streamlined the process.  The ability to review the notes for each version has and to easily revert to a previous version has proven useful.

SharePoint has also helped us improve the accessibility of official company documentation across our different teams.

In conjunction with SharePoint Designer, we’ve also been able to create a social hub on our SharePoint homepage where we can share news, photos, and company announcements.

SharePoint's document management and workflow features have proven to be the valuable. We have been able to implement a reliable, easily accessible document library with version control (previously managed manually) and an announcements workflow that allows us to communicate site specific news easily.

I find the search feature in SharePoint foundation to be limited to the basic document properties. This is at odds to the type of customization that you can apply in the library. For example, we added a field to specify the department but found that the field had little or no bearing on the search results. We found it hard to determine how SharePoint uses the document properties in the search, and whether it uses anything beyond the document title.
Once we had a better understanding of Foundation's limitations, we updated our properties accordingly, with a strong focus on the document title property as a search term. This involved an extensive rework of our existing documentation structure and naming conventions to better suit SharePoint. Despite these changes, we still can't seem to get our version of SharePoint to return meaningful results, even when searching an exact document title.
I realize that this is a limitation of the version that we are using but I would like the Foundation search criteria to be more clearly defined so that document managers know what they are working with from the start.

We have had no stability issues that I am aware of.

So far, we have not had any issues with scalability. We are investigating upgrading to the Enterprise edition in the future, so this may change.

Our technical support is all in-house, so I can’t really supply a meaningful response.

I have found a wealth of support information (on SharePoint blogs and forums) which has helped me troubleshoot a variety of issues.

As already mentioned, our previous documentation solution was manual, using a folder structure accessible through Windows Explorer.

The switch to SharePoint was motivated by the desire to improve availability of our documentation and to streamline our document management processes.

Initially, I was only involved in the setup of the document management portion of our site. I found it very user-friendly and easy to configure.

Since then, I have been involved in the setup and maintenance of a second site from scratch. Although certain aspects have been quite easy to configure, I experienced a lot of difficulty when working with user permissions and content types.

The content types were difficult to configure initially. When I need to edit or update certain properties, I could not determine where, or how, to change them. We eventually decided to remove them from our implementation.

I’m not able to offer an informed opinion about pricing, but if you are looking for a robust document management system, the Enterprise edition might be the better choice.

The metadata features promise to improve the document search function. The built-in document management workflows seem very promising. These are the features motivating our desire to upgrade.

We considered replacing our SharePoint system with Atlassian Confluence. Although it does offer basic document management, it is not robust enough to meet our document management needs.

SharePoint has built in document management functionality, while Confluence relies on macros and third-party apps. We felt that the risk of relying on potentially unsupported apps outweighed any other benefits.

We still use Confluence as a collaborative work space and will be using the Confluence wikis as our knowledge base solution.

Our implementation could have been improved by a more detailed implementation plan that mapped out the exact use of each area and how to use it.

With this in mind, I would recommend that anyone who is considering SharePoint plan their implementation thoroughly before beginning.