RE: Anyone use Sharepoint Portal?

Oh there is one more con, I think it's a dirty little
secret that if you're using Sharepoint as your
intranet you'll get hit hard on licenses.  

Yes it's free with Server 2003 but they don't license
it on a per-user basis for your intranet so watch out.
 That's just what I've heard around here so be
careful, my friend.

Bryan

I would almost always go with something my developers
can author than get something out of the box that the
business has to settle for.  The business is happier
and my developers stay busy.




--- Brice Dunwoodie <bdunwood-/[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cms mailing list
> [email protected]
> Subscription controls:
> http://lists.cms-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/cms
> Netiquette FAQ and related CMS lists - [cms-forum],
> [cms-pr], [contentmanagers], [cmpros]
> http://www.cmsreview.com/NetiquetteFAQ.html
> http://www.cms-lists.org
>