RE: Anyone use Sharepoint Portal?
"Brice Dunwoodie" <bdunwood-/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.cms.cms-forum.general |
|---|---|
| Organization | Cylogy, Inc. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Just a couple of quick thoughts: - CON: cross-browser support can be weak with SharePoint's out of the box web parts ....not a big surprise that IE works best. - PRO: Looking at the third-party add-on market, you can find/pick and choose some useful extensions - PRO: .NET web parts are fairly easy to develop and there's a large number of consulting/engineering/3rd party resources around the core technology. -Brice <[email protected]> wrote: > Just got back from a 3-day training session on using MS Sharepoint > Portal. > > It looks like a nice product. We are going to overhaul our intranet > soon and this is one of the contenders for a framework. The bulk of > our intranet is office documents, with some custom content here and > there. > > Had anyone uses Sharepoint Portal as an intranet toolset? If so, > thoughts? > Pros? Cons? > > >From the short course we took, I came away with > this: > > Pros: > - good user/group/permissions management > - fairly decent document uploading, etc. > - good content 'pushing' abilities (the ability to notify > various groups about updated content) > > Cons: > - like a lot of CMS products we've looked at, it seems to > do several things 'OK' but nothing 'great'. > - lacks a lot of customization (all Table based output, > limited navigation control, limited functionality > with the built in 'web parts') > - Like a lot of CMS products, this seemed like it was designed > for one specific task/group scenario and then 'marketed' as > a broader product than it actually is. > > Since it's an intranet, the lack of customization isn't as big of a > deal to me as it was/is regarding the CMS products we looked at for > our public site. > But the limited functionality of the web-parts seemed to put me off a > bit. > While we really like the user/group stuff, we're not sure if that > feature outweighs the fact that we could probably easily develop our > own custom set of 'web parts' using our own CMS tools instead. > Thoughts? > > -Darrel