SharePoint Reviews

We primarily use SharePoint for content management and as a repository for documents. It serves as a document management and storage solution for both department-related and company-related information. 

SharePoint also offers collaboration features, such as online editing of documents, allowing us to co-edit documents in real-time.

SharePoint has integrated well with our internal platforms, such as Outlook, Microsoft Teams, and Microsoft Office 365. It provides not only a document storage solution but also a collaborative solution. 

It has inbuilt workflows, security permissions, versioning, and supports a lot of apps for surveys and no-code applications. It's beneficial for internal communication and coordination.

SharePoint's collaborative features are valuable as they enable productivity by allowing multiple users to edit documents simultaneously. 

It integrates with internal platforms like Microsoft Teams and Office 365, enhances productivity, and provides security and versioning capabilities.

The search functionality could be improved, especially when dealing with 'lift' lists, where there are performance issues. 

The aesthetics of certain fields are not up to the mark compared to other products.

I have had experience working with SharePoint for more than five years.

The stability of SharePoint is high; it is quite stable and resilient.

SharePoint is scalable. It uses SQL Server for storing content and configurations, making it easy to scale from a load-balancing and infrastructure perspective.

Microsoft support could be better, especially for enterprise troubleshooting. They require a lot of logs and often rely on online support, which does not meet customer expectations.

Neutral

Before SharePoint, we used Lotus Notes and others. Due to Microsoft's aggressive pricing, SharePoint became the preferred choice.

The initial setup for SharePoint Online is easy, while SharePoint On Premise is complex and requires more resources.

Managing SharePoint requires skilled administrators and developers, especially for large enterprise-grade farms.

I am not involved in the licensing, but Microsoft offers bundled pricing for Office, SharePoint, and Exchange, making it cost-effective.

There are other cloud-based solutions like Confluence and Jira, which can achieve similar results as SharePoint.

With the availability of fantastic products on the cloud, it is advisable to move towards cloud-based solutions rather than setting up complex on-premises structures. However, enterprises that use Microsoft Office often find value in using SharePoint.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

SharePoint is a backend for Microsoft Teams. We predominantly use Teams and OneDrive. We use them to manage all our systems integration and documents. We collaborate with documents and design. The product is the central repository for our business. We also use it for document control.

The product provides flexibility in collaboration. It is a simple tool. We use it across the board for scheduling and resource management. I use a lot of the add-ons. It is a very valuable product.

The solution doesn’t support PDF signatures on Android. My staff has tablets and phones. We couldn’t sign the documents on Android. It was quite problematic.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

We haven't had any issues with the tool’s stability.

I never had an issue with the tool’s scalability. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We have 120 users.

I have deployed the tool for two businesses. It is not easy to navigate. The initial setup process is not intuitive. Other platforms are intuitive with the setup. Once it's set up, it's good. It is a cloud-based solution.

The pricing is competitive.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It offers an easy way to store unstructured content (.pdf, .doc, .xls, images) and to tag them with metadata. More complex solutions may involve workflow up receipt of the content.

Replace paper file cabinets with electronic images which can be duplicated for disaster recovery purposes. Workflow can be used to notify or obtain approval covering the document.

Too many versions being released in a short time period. Too much time being devoted to migration planning.

Over 10 years, working with different versions up through 2013.

Stability issues are usually related to poor architecture planning, or solutions developed without a knowledge of how the tool works.

If properly deployed, the solution is very scalable. It’s really easy to have many servers in a farm solution, and many farms in an enterprise solution.

Trying to get technical support from Microsoft is always challenging. It seems large Fortune 1000 companies can get support.

You can deploy a web/database solution but it will take a lot of development time. SharePoint is a Rapid Application Development platform where a simple library, indexed, can be deployed in minutes.

The setup is straightforward, however many of the architecture issues should be discussed prior to deployment. Matching the setup to the organization’s needscan make the installation complex.

It’s not cheap. Through version 2010, there was a "free" version called Foundation. All of the good features are in the Standard and Enterprise versions. Starting with 2013, the Foundation version was discontinued.
Licensing can be by server or by seat.

There are similar solutions, like Lotus Notes/Domino and open source versions.

Open source rarely offers support, and I wouldn’t want to have a systems issue with all of my content locked up.

As long as you work within the constraints of the software, working with out-of-the-box tools, the product is great. If you start to customize the solution too much or install code on the servers, migrations and upgrades become a problem.

Spend some time and money up front discussing your wants and needs with someone who is knowledgeable. For content management, think about the whole lifecycle, from receipt to purging the content from your system.

For SharePoint 2013:

• My Sites
• News-feed
• Discussions
• Communities

The Office 365 version shows real promise, although the mobile use of Discussions does not work as expected. Newsfeed does though. Not sure about Communities.

It's providing a social collaboration experience to a culture of heavy email users. They are not used to interacting on our intranet or other internal environments, having a profile to provide others more info about themselves, or searching for experts, information, etc. This is a helpful step to evolve the culture to be more digitally collaborative.

• The linkage between items, such as the blog. It does not integrate into communities or team sites, it's totally separate in its own environment. Tags and @mentions are not connected to them either. They feel very disconnected. Our leaders would like to use blogs but since they aren't connected to anything else they aren't a great solution.
• We are on premise so the mobile experience is also very lacking since users need to use a VPN on their device in order to utilize things.
• There aren't any metrics provided out of the box. I have to ask for just the number of new users each month and it takes days. There should be more data that we can use available to us as admins.

I've used for six to nine months.

We migrated from another company and moved from SP2010 to 2013 during the same time. There were a lot of hurdles, and people have profile problems (most of those issues have not fully migrated).

Stability, even after deployment three months ago, still seems to be an issue. Tagging does not always show up in trending hashtags immediately. When tagging and @mentions work is not consistent from place to place.

We are on two farms so it is not a truly global solution which is frustrating when trying to communicate about global programs and events. Those in the Europe farm cannot follow the majority of our content in the North American farm.

Our SharePoint 2013 platform is hosted at HP and they manage services for us. HP support is getting better just as of the past few weeks. They do not seem to have a great handle on SP2013 social however.

HP has not been great but we've really brought the issues to light over the past few weeks so they are stepping up their game.

This is the first time using it at this company.

IT was not very transparent about providing what the tools can and cannot do. As a user, I had to figure it all out, ask a lot of questions then get them to explain why or why not we could or could not do certain things.

HP does not seem very knowledgeable about SP2013 social.

I believe IT looked at Yammer but felt our culture could just use SP2013 for free first to get our feet wet before investing in another tool. There are no business requirements for an Enterprise Social Network yet so with the pitfalls of using SP2013 out of the box, we are seeing what we actually need vs. what we have.

Perform a controlled pilot first with social advocates in the company first. Nail down the business requirements with management before rolling anything out. Get their buy-in and support. Once that is decided, pilot several other tools to see what else is out there. Yammer isn't the only other solution for SharePoint. Compare costs, etc, select a solution, create a social governance team, train them well, provide guidance templates if needed and create regular training or webinars for people to get on board. Have leaders use the tool to communicate and move away from email.

I am not an architect or a consultant for SharePoint. I use SharePoint services mainly for accessing data when someone uploads it and using it for my reviewing purposes or updating documentation. I do not create any subsites in SharePoint or internal architecture specific to SharePoint.

SharePoint allows Microsoft to have most of their documentation on SharePoint online. When I need to work on a particular deliverable, the requirement is to prepare a PowerPoint slide or documentation which I then upload on their SharePoint portal. This centralized location allows them to review and store documentation long term. 

Additionally, SharePoint manages version control, which makes it easier to track and amend documentation accurately, maintaining document integrity and enabling quick recovery if necessary.

SharePoint provides a centralized storage solution where documents can be kept and reviewed. It is valuable for collaboration because multiple people can work on a document simultaneously, which enhances multi-user accessibility. Additionally, SharePoint acts as a version control system, allowing easy recovery of past document versions.

I am not sure if SharePoint has been integrated with Copilot at the moment. The introduction of AI and automation with Copilot could be a beneficial improvement.

I have been using SharePoint for the last 15 years.

SharePoint is quite stable, rated at nine point five. As a Microsoft 365 product, it has a lot of backend redundancy. I have not seen any outages unless there is a major data center outage in Microsoft.

SharePoint is massively scalable and I would rate it as 8.5 out of ten. However, this question seems more oriented towards architecture specifics, which I do not handle.

I have never communicated with technical support for SharePoint.

Positive

Before SharePoint, we had some kind of a local repository, like file servers, where we shared updates with managers and stored documentation.

I am not an architect or admin for SharePoint. I use it as a normal user.

I am not the decision-maker here because I am working for Microsoft and they use their own products for internal purposes.

SharePoint is user-friendly and interactive, making it easy for someone new to the computer industry to navigate. For normal end-user functionality, Microsoft has made this tool quite intuitive.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use SharePoint for intranet purposes.

The most valuable feature is the ability to easily build intranet sites for communicating within teams, storing documentation, product information, pricing policies, updates on product infrastructure, and other related news.

Perhaps it would be possible to add more design tools to improve the platform. While the current design is good, other similar platforms, such as Wix.com, offer better design tools. Wix.com is a website-building site that specializes in this area. Microsoft could take inspiration from them and incorporate similar tools.

The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement.

The documentation is poor and has room for improvement.

I have been using SharePoint for a few years.

I give SharePoint's stability an eight out of ten because of the mobile app integration issues.

I give SharePoint's scalability a ten out of ten.

The technical support is inadequate, and this appears to be a common experience shared by many online.

The initial setup process is complicated, and unfortunately, the available documentation and guidance are inadequate. As a result, we have to resort to watching online tutorials, reading forums, and even asking friends for help. The most challenging aspect of the setup is integrating the website with the mobile app.

I give the initial setup a six out of ten.

My team took two weeks to complete the deployment. We began by collecting the necessary documentation to include on the intranet site. Then, we created four design templates for the pages and utilized them to develop product information, pricing policies, news postings, and the most effective communication menu for our team.

The implementation was completed in-house.

SharePoint is included with our Microsoft license.

SharePoint is more complex and less intuitive than Wix.com, making it harder to design and create templates.

I give SharePoint an eight out of ten.

We have 30 technical people that use SharePoint within our organization.

I recommend that prospective users watch the instructional videos before searching extensively, as this will save them time. While the accompanying documentation may be lacking, many helpful videos can be found on YouTube and other platforms. I believe that investing time in these videos will ultimately result in time saved.

We are a company that provides Microsoft cloud services and data sourcing. Our business involves reselling licenses and equipment.

It is an eDMS. We use it for electronic document management.

The security feature is valuable. We have control over who has access to what and when. We also have the audit trails to review who accessed what at what time. The document versioning is also a valuable feature. We can have multiple versions of the same document. If there is an issue or if there's something that we missed on a document, we can easily roll back to the previous version and get our data the way it was.

The product must provide more automation. We must be able to automate tasks instead of doing them manually. The product must enable customization of features. It must allow integration with other systems. Integrating the tool into databases like Oracle or Microsoft SQL and pulling data from SharePoint would be helpful.

I have been using the solution for close to five years.

I am satisfied with the tool’s stability. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The tool is scalable. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We have eight users in our organization.

The initial setup is easy. I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. It is a cloud solution. A person with some knowledge about the solution can deploy it in four to five hours. One person can do the deployment.

The product is reasonably priced.

I will recommend the solution to others because of its security features. Security is key for any organization. The tool is very scalable and stable. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We internally use SharePoint for all of our document management, and we integrate that with D365. We use CRM and SharePoint to manage our sales pipeline and all documentation related to Sales and subsequent projects are stored on SharePoint. We use the Power platform for certain workflows, for example, approvals of Business Proposals. 

We have created our own custom modules within D365 for our project billing. 

SharePoint allows us to manage the full lifecycle of documents within our organization. 

I do like the collaboration around documents. The versioning history has proven useful in some instances as well. 

It's also very easy to use. I like the fact that we can integrate with various other applications.

For my role, it personally covers all my requirements. 

I've been using this solution for about twenty years. we have always used the latest version of SharePoint, as well as CRM, which is now D365.

I haven't had any issues around that. It's all very stable once it's deployed.

Based on things I've heard, I'd rate it a six out of ten. Just from the feedback I've had from developers working with SharePoint Designer, they do feel that there are some limitations. For SharePoint, most of our clients are medium-sized organizations.

We do most of the support for our clients, but I do know that on very odd occasions, which was a few years ago and doesn't happen as much nowadays because it is more stable, when we have logged support calls with Microsoft, they have always been great. Over the last few years, their support has certainly improved from 14 years ago when support was difficult. I'd rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I wasn't involved in its deployment, but I can think back to projects that we have done with SharePoint with customers. Obviously, the project itself will be dependent on how many customizations they need, but they are generally not very long projects. We have had some that are done in two to three weeks including customization and deploying everything. It isn't a difficult deployment process from my experience.

It's a good buy for small to medium businesses that are looking for a basic document management solution. If you have a Microsoft environment, you obviously got the benefit of it natively integrating with the whole Office suite. It's quite easy to integrate with other applications as well, but if you're looking for something more scalable and robust, you may want to investigate other products before making that choice.

I'd rate it an eight out of ten.