SharePoint Reviews

The document library feature in this product is most valuable.

This product does a good job of maintaining an easy, searchable knowledge base, which is the key for supporting applications and business teams.

I personally don't use this product. However, my clients find it useful for locating documents in a format, that is easy to navigate.

Submitting document changes function needs to be improved.

It is hard to identify deltas in documents especially ones with drawings.

The process of updating a document on the fly takes a while to download and update.I am used to robust versions of management systems and hence end up using Apache Subversion (SVN) rather than SharePoint for version management.

I would also like to see who makes the changes inside the documents, that are managed.

I have used this product on and off for 10 years.

I have encountered stability issues when connecting to TFS 2013 for reporting.

I have not yet encountered any scalability issues.

I have not used any technical support.

Previously, I have used HP document solutions. I made the switch to SharePoint as it was what the client was using.

The initial setup for me was fairly simple.

I don't know since I did not source the production and used existing licenses.

I did not evaluate other options as I have not purchased this product.

It is best to ensure that all configuration options are explored when connecting
to other solutions.

SharePoint’s most valuable feature is its use for community building. It turns large scores of people into a more cohesive group by creating a central working environment for documents, conversations, knowledge sharing, processes, tasks and content.

We have a variety of use cases internally, but an easy one for everyone to understand is the creation of the “company meeting” slide show. Every two weeks, everyone in our company gets together to hear from each other about the “goings on” in the company. Each area of the business gets the opportunity to present a few slides. In the past, these slides were emailed to a central point and some poor person had to collate it before all staff arrived. Now, with SharePoint and Office 365, all the business areas are able to edit their part of the PowerPoint file at any time, from anywhere. This saves plenty of time, removes embarrassing copy and paste errors, and also gives staff a central reference point after the meeting to catch up on what was presented.

The user interface, although extensible, leaves much to the imagination when compared to modern websites. Companies, like ourselves, are able to transform the front end into anything, but this consulting process sometimes scares off would be clients. Adoption remains a challenge (not really a product fault). Lastly, the workflow remains a kind of ugly sister. Improvements have been made in the form of “flow” (only available on Office 365). But, all in all, companies normally have to invest in third-party tools, such as K2 / Nintex, if they really want to create enterprise-grade workflow processes.

I have been using this solution for 13 years.

We did not encounter any stability issues. In most cases, instability is caused by client or vendor implementation errors.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability. SharePoint actually scales really well as you’re able to add roles and servers to your heart’s content. Office 365 also has a number of clever resource throttling capabilities, which allows administrators to prioritize certain areas over others.

We received excellent technical support. We have no complaints there.

We never tried to implement a solution other than SharePoint.

In the early days 2003, the initial setup of SharePoint was highly complex, but nowadays it has been streamlined a lot. The challenge, however, is not the basic installations. It is creating something that is ready to take advantage of the scalability and other platform benefits without revising the architecture.

More than 75% of our interactions now are with clients that already have Office 365 (which includes SharePoint), so the pricing is normally bundled with that. We do discuss specifics when it comes to the amount of storage included. For on site deployments, clients need to license each server, as well as each client access license (CAL).

As a vendor, our typical scenario is that the product was already chosen, and we are just implementing it. As SharePoint is a platform with many capabilities, plenty of products compete with specific areas of SharePoint, but hardly anyone can offer everything that SharePoint does.

Before starting the project, it’s critical to understand what you want to achieve. Just installing it because IT owns it, will not accomplish your goals. If you have well-defined use case for it, and the solution is geared toward delivering on that ROI, SharePoint is a great fit. Special attention must be given to ongoing adoption and training and it’s critical that you choose your vendor very carefully. Many vendors understand a bit, but only a handful have walked the walk and know the many pitfalls of splash and dash deployments.

• DMS
• ECM
• Collaboration
• Portals
• Search
• BI
• Mobile support
• Business process management
• LOB integration

Global accessibility over O365 increased the collaboration within the organization.

I have used it for more than 11 years.

I have not encountered any stability issues, as such.

There were scalability issues with SP 2013, but MS made some improvements in SP 2016.

Technical support from MS is great, especially in the cloud area.

We were previously using a custom solution that was hard to maintain and there was also lack of user adoption. With SP, we were able to see great improvement in those areas.

Initial setup was straightforward.

Go for O365 plans that have different pricing as per business needs.

From the beginning, I was in favour of SharePoint. However, for customers, we have evaluated solutions such as Liferay, Sitecore, Drupal, etc.

For enterprise global collaboration, DMS, and ECM needs, this is the right platform.

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.

• Company intranet and extranet.
• Enabling the employee workforce to be more efficient in their day-to-day work they need to deliver for the organisation.

• Document management and sharing with user-controlled security
• Ability to use lists, document management, and workflow to manage the hand-off of work efforts internal to the organisation.

• Document libraries (tagging and search)
• Lists
• Workflow (added)
• Security
• Alerts
• Publishing features and co-authoring.

It is functionalities that improve the efficiency of the employee workforce.

• Better collaboration, and team sites (social flavour) mobile enabled

• More and improved integration capabilities into the eco-system of solutions available.

Integration with Office 365 and Active Directory, and access from all our company users as part of the Office 365 licenses. Also, hassle free access from mobile devices to sites, forms, and lists, with powerful content search and preview.

We use it for all intensive document sharing business units and especially for document versioning control (quality control area in manufacturing). We also use the online forms (Infopath) to automate simple procedures in conjunction with Microsoft Flow..

The cloud-local file synchronization application (OneDrive for Business). It is not as simple as expected, but it works.

I have used SharePoint since 2013. From on-premise to the online version.

Sharepoint Online is a mature product.

We have had no issues with stability.

We have had no issues with scalability, but you must buy additional storage if you use the given amount within your tenant (enterprise plans: 1 TB + .5 GB per subscribed user).

The customer service is very good.

Technical support is really good; fast responses and good resolutions within the standard included support.

We used SharePoint 2010 on premise. We switched due to the license cost and to give access to all our company users. Also, because SPO was included in the Office 365 plans. As a SaaS, it is always up to date.

Setup was not complex at all. We used third party tools to migrate productive sites and the new sites were created easily. The main difficulty is user adoption. It must be done with a lot of workshops.

We implement through a Microsoft Partner. The expertise was very high.

No ROI calculation, but today we have almost all of our procedures online - paperless office.

You can always make a good deal with Microsoft, especially shortly before the end of their fiscal year (July).

We did a business case and technical evaluation of Google Apps and Office 365. The winner was Office 365 due to user familiarity.

It is always good to start with a special need in a business unit and show quick wins to other units, as part of the adoption plan.

The ability to assign an attribute to a library artifact allows the site owner to create the appropriate views based on artifact attributes (category, owner, etc.).

I have updated my project sites with views that apply to specific business uses, such as a project manager looking for a document assigned to a phase in the project (i.e., planning, design, execution) or an engineer looking for a document type (i.e., vendor contract, design build diagram, user acceptance testing worksheet).

Unless you have worked with a SharePoint business analyst, designer or power user, managing individual sites does require training to understand the components of the site settings and content. Folks usually start using SharePoint as a file repository without any structure. It can be overwhelming when you have 1,000's of document that a user has to parse through if just looking for a specific title. Without a consistent framework consisting of a standard nomenclature established in the initial strategy of rolling out SharePoint, using SharePoint as a file share becomes unruly.

I've worked with various SharePoint versions since 2008 but more recently with 2010 and 2013 as a power user in managing artifacts for various project and programs.

Most instances of SharePoint are stable. I have rarely experienced instability. Usually, it’s the management of user names and groups that results in problems.

I am not at the experience level to notice such an issue.

Most of the technical support has come from SME's and internal developers.

I always used Sharepoint.

I have no experience with rolling out templates or actual new instances.

Get training for IT and training for your base user. Developing a framework (nomenclature, categorization and user needs).

• Team site sharing
• Internal collaboration
• Intranet websites
• Document archive storage

Our pre-sales, technical and sales folks use SharePoint to archive files, share configurations and presentations, etc.

Intranet/website publishing tools and features are kludgy and sometimes defy logic.

The ribbon interface is not intuitive. Information rights management is difficult. It is not standards based.

The custom .net usage in fact requires Windows Azure, which takes the complexity to another level. Also, you need to build this into your existing business systems to make full use of the features.

Regarding publishing, there seems to be a gap with HTML 5 publishing tools and/or tools like Dreamweaver and such, which lack strategy, synergy and standards, from my point of view.

Also, searching for information appears based on Bing and that is utterly useless. One needs to bolt a Google search engine onto your solution for optimum results.

SharePoint in either server or cloud offerings is itself very complicated in terms of all the moving parts to consider, which takes time to figure out regarding feature sets and use cases for them.

It would be nice to see a top-notch web-publishing tool that a five year old could use to go with the suite of Office online applications with much better integration with serious 3rd party search tools.

It’s nice to have server or Azure based options, but a hybrid cloud that offers both needs some work. Neither HPE or Dell are competent with their appliance offerings in the CPS space that could be offered as a package, if customized and developed into a single SKU appliance-based platform with all the goodies inside the rack.

Plug, play and connect…customize, develop and deploy. Repeat...

I have used SharePoint for four years at various customers plus my own company.

I have never encountered stability issues.

It has not reached it’s scalability envelope yet.

Outstanding support on SharePoint, in particular from Microsoft.

We used NetMax. The OpenStack Linux stuff is hacked like no other.

Setup is very simple, though all the features take a while to get your arms around (foundation, server, designer, business sync, etc.).

Use volume licensing to get the best pricing from Microsoft for a customer.

We looked at NetMax and various Linux offerings.

Tread slowly and do the basic training.