• Business centricity with more tools relating to SEO and content targeting, for instance, cookie management to collect web data, etc.
• Staging and LARs export/import features. This is always a pain in Liferay with many errors caused mostly by some inconsistent data in the database. It should be improved for sure, because this is a very interesting feature for business people, and currently, it is very hard to use it.
• Provide official Docker images as a production distributable solution. The trend is to go to PaaS based solutions as container platforms, and Liferay doesn't provide this kind of option OOTB.
• Architecture based in distributed/remote micro-services with containers. The idea of "break the monolith" at the application layer using OSGi is OK, but it's still running in a unique JVM as a whole. I think it is still a monolithic approach.
• Liferay Connecting Service (LCS) needs to improve to support the elastic licensing and be ready for container support. It needs some UI improvements, such as server management or subscription to environment options which have certain limitations.
• Official training should be improved, by creating upgraded short courses for people who already know Liferay technology.
• The official certification lost interest for me personally, since people can buy the exam answers on the Internet. I think Liferay should fight against this practice, because I cannot trust people who have a Liferay certificate, and it reduces the value of my own efforts to obtain the certification.

Its SSL-based client authentication support needs to be improved.

SSL and proxy configuration in Liferay: Basically, the visitors connect to the site with HTTP and for a few secured apps, the request is automatically routed as HTTPS. Liferay provides a good amount of support for Apache servers.

Example:
SSLCertificateFile="/etc/ssl/tomcat/cpcert.crt"
SSLCertificateKeyFile="/etc/ssl/tomcat/devevn.pem"
SSLPass="

If you want to do something more lightweight, the effort you need to put in initially might be a bit high for your purposes. The learning curve is too steep if you want to do something simple. It may be better to take something that is more intuitive out-of-the-box like WordPress, or some other very simple content management system. To use Liferay Digital to its potential, you need some skills. For example, you need to know Java to do some more interesting things. I guess that is the main con or disadvantage of this kind of system. If you have those more advanced skills on your staff already, you are in a good position to work with Liferay. If you are a basic web developer or you have a very small organization, I don't think I would work with it. It may be nice if the product were a little easier for the beginner, but not if it is going to dumb-down the product.  

I think the marketplace area could be better. Right now it has hundreds of extensions or other third-party solutions. I think if they had thousands of extensions that would be even better in providing more flexibility. I think they should turn more into the field of cognitive solutions. That would mean adding chatbots, adding extensions, adding integration with AI systems like Watson. I would like to see more expansion to make the solution more complete. It could have better built-in integration so users can search for and find things they might want like language analytics, chatbots solution, et cetera. I think they should work on making this possible. I don't see a lot of other platforms with that kind of solution yet. I think the future of content management is going that way. Chatbots is one of the preferred interfaces that customers want rather than web chat or mobile.  

Integration might extend to things like Google Drive. We see people working with that a lot. Maybe even more integration with email systems, other Google apps and Office 365. As part of the workplace, we see that users want those systems very tightly integrated. I would also look at integrating with CRM systems like Salesforce or a feature pack that can create a CRM integrated portal. I would look at integrating with cognitive AI services in order to provide the next step of content management systems. That is the way I would expect Liferay to go to from here.  

It could have better stability and performance tuning.

Support provided for the Enterprise Edition is really poor. The support is poor because of the delayed response and less-technology support provided.

Sometimes, the customer needs more troubleshooting from the vendor, especially in the initial period, i.e., while setting up the development platform or deployment environment.

• Theme for mobile
• Loading less files on mobile with rules
• Accessing Liferay as an app on mobile: The Liferay mobile SDK might solve this.
• Pricing
• Modularization of apps would help: Even if we don't need a particular feature, it still gets deployed with Liferay. Liferay 7.0 will solve it, hopefully.

Technology trends change so quickly that a product has to continuously evolve and improve what it offers. There was a time when Liferay’s documentation was not up to the mark. However, the release of new versions and the setup of dev.liferay.com brought fantastic documentation for developers, administrators, and business stakeholders.

There are still some parts where Liferay can improve:

• Document library: Allow you to view and preview all popular types of files
• Auditing capability

Since we did not implement the product, I do not have a suggestion for improvement. 

Major upgrades switch the Liferay framework core structure dramatically in EVERY occasion. However, there were only subtle changes from the last minor upgrade to the major upgrade.

The integration area needs to be improved. It needs to be more user-friendly.

The integration and configuration need to be simplified. If for example, I had to configure the application to a payment module, especially in the business licensing system, it would be better if we could have a feature that would require less code to enable easy integration with other systems.

The end-user requires training, some knowledge transfer is needed. It has been proven to be a challenge, because we don't have any in Tanzania, and we don't have a data center for Liferay.

In the next release, the integration capabilities need to be easier to use by someone who is not as technical. Also, when it comes to troubleshooting, the logs need to be published on a page that's easier to use rather than going to a folder somewhere.

The easy, straightforward cases are usually the only ones that are documented. Once you need to do something a little more advanced, you usually won't find any examples and will have to resort to looking through the code to find a place where they do something similar and figure out how it works by stepping through that in a debugger.

They also really like to create new libraries to do stuff (AlloyUI, Metal.js, Senna.js, etc.) instead of seeing what is already available and trying to adapt that for portal use (and possibly committing that back). And lastly, we've run in to a lot of bugs that tend to come back in every version. Things get fixed in one version and after upgrading you run into the same bug again.

I would like to see them arrange more symposiums in India, because most of the resources who work on Liferay are from India, more than any other country.

I'd like for them to have more interactive sessions, training or face-to-face meetings with the Liferay core team for Developers, so that we can have our questions/clarifications clarified directly with them, rather than asking over a webinar session, through forums, through support tickets, etc.

PHP offers more plugins than Liferay. The plugins should be more affordable.

Liferay needs to offer more in terms of updates and development. WordPress is constantly offering new updates and new features; I hardly see that with Liferay — although, it could be because we don't have an enterprise license.

Also, an e-commerce plugin tool would be a nice feature. 

• Ability to create content
• A cloud offering

I would like to see an improvement on the Ecommerce platform.

The loading speed could be improved.

Social areas and capabilities need improvement. If you compare this product with Jive or other standard social business platforms, Liferay has room to improve in terms of reusability, functions, and capabilities. Jive and other leading social business company platforms all have a lot of add-ons. Liferay could add some social add-ons.

There should be less documentation about the differences and migration from the older versions is a must.

Aspects of Campaign management and audience targeting is fast maturing, where the experience tracked in online channels are feeding into the offline journeys and influencing the content promoted from that channel and vice versa the learnings from offline channels like (email) through composite campaign tracking and optimizations cycles gives newer areas of segmentation which can be fed back to online channels for a omni-potent personalization and content targeting approach.

Other competitor product lines are absorbing the complete cycle of this fast changing dynamic offering management coaxed with 360 view of customer to fuel in some of the immersive experience offering, this is a space where Liferay DXP still need to venture and explore the scenarios on how the current great abilities of campaign and audience management can be tied back to such situations and provide a complete online-offline personalization experience which is consistent, trackable and ever evolving with customer view feedback to strike that right winning content user is looking to convert.

On further note to explain DAM and the abilities on the same, it’s again a space which has several flavours of existence. DAM within a Portal or CMS system is just good for the marketers who want to have an integrated platform to manage medium volumes of simplistic assets for web journey authoring, but as we unfold this obvious world of things, there is an abyss of requirements features which can be offered to become an Enterprise DAM offering, to name few will be ability to transform assets (especially media assets) based on bandwidth, renditions, panoramic view generations, mixed media assets, video trackings and recommendations, asset monetization along with further maturing into copyright management spiralling into Information rights management within these systems. (this is just one quick example to pick within the Enterprise DAM abilities)

Other competitors in this space has started to carve out variations of DAM for small to large scale enterprise implementations and have started to offer their product lines as distinctive offerings , small to mid scale DAM (implicit within the portals, CMS platform), large scale standalone variation of the offering as standalone enterprise DAM, Renditions and Transformation Management Advance Media Management Systems and Cloud DAM offering best of breed solutions between features of a DAM and a MAM (Media Asset Management) solutions. These variations helps customer make the right choice from the offerings available and strike the right balancing cord to decide what will be the best fit in their ecosystem. DAM offering from Liferay is still an experience which falls into the first variation of offering (small to mid-scale DAM offering) from within platform which need to scale into larger aspects of Enterprise DAM so as to be competing strongly with similar offerings in market by other niche DAM as well as Enterprise Experience players.

Documentation is an issue and needs to be improved. Asset publishing can be a bit complicated, but once you have some running, it gets easier.

There are several areas that need improvement:

• The core code base needs refactoring. It’s very hard to understand it when trying to do customizations.
• They could remove the business logic from the UI (JSPs) and stop using scriptlets in JSPs.
• Data integrity should be at the database level (normalization/foreign keys) and not at the application level.
• Also, they need to upgrade third party libraries (e.g., Spring) to the newest versions. Liferay is stuck on Spring 3.2, while Spring 4.3.x is the last version and they are working on a 5.0 framework.
• Use Java Config instead of XML config.
• Add support for JBoss EAP domain mode
• Source code sharing in SVN/git still needs to be revisited

• The documentation can be more detailed and better structured. A lot of the information is very often obtained by posting questions to the community or reaching out to Liferay support.
• It lacks true multi-tenant support.
• Liferay is missing features that would seamlessly integrate with cloud features such as auto-scaling, the ability to isolate a tenant to a specific instance, and cloud integrated notifications.

Liferay needs a better web content search engine.

The API documentation could be improved, as well as the debugging tools.

The documentation provided needs to be more detailed. It's sometimes hard to develop things because the documentation is so sparse.

The forums should have more content and cover more areas of the solution. It's also not so easy to navigate through it.

Although it has been improving, I cannot shake the feeling that it was released too early. It came with several problems, and new releases came extremely fast to correct the previous ones. Now, in its GA3, the differences are noticeable between the general release and the master source code.

The correction of issues take too long to arrive, unless a license is acquired, which seems a bit odd for an open-source project.

The bottom line is that it is too early for general adoption, as a GA4 is clearly needed.

A second issue would be around documentation. For some time, this has been one of my main complaints around Liferay. The learning curve seems to be high as the platform is immense and extremely flexible. Thus, it is only natural that some complexity is involved in using it to its full potential.

However, the documentation for developers is incomplete and there is a strong reliance on GitHub.

The previous version even had a great book to support developers. We can see that the development documentation in the web site is evolving, but it still has formatting issues and has a long way to go to reflect the greatness of the project.

Any developer familiar with the platform and with its source knows that there is a hidden power that is still to be documented.

Documentation for the newly launched version is not up to the mark. It would really be a great help for developers if they were to get proper documentation of the features.

Documentation needs improvement. But this too has evolved over time and is still a work in progress.

Liferay is a phenomenal product with deficient marketing. More OOTB examples are needed to allow the user to faster realize it's full potential. We also need better translations. Some of the multi-lingual functionality can be improved.

We found it difficult to upload documents. It seemed unnecessarily complex.

I am having a hard time getting through the security scans. I wish there were documentation to create some settings that would prevent scanning for each language when you are using a particular language.

• Documentation
• Mobility
• Theme development is tough for UI guys. A UI guy needs to learn to work with Liferay.

The front-end technologies need improvement.

Liferay does currently lack a good integrated analytics package, automation, and filtering.

There are a lot of possibilities for improvement in several areas.

I would like to see it require fewer configurations from the properties file, and provide more GUI options to configure changes.

I’d also like to maybe see virus scanning for file uploads.

The documentation could be better.

As it is open source, it has lots of features and it is constantly updating. Therefore, bugs also keep coming. More quality improvement is required.

Liferay requires more room to provide ease of use for the content contributors.

I would like to see better documentation. Updates in the documentation do not follow updates in the code and functionality.

There is always is something to improve. I welcome improving the DMS camp and more easy collaboration with Microsoft Active Directory.

It could be improved in terms of adding filters to some of the rules. Therefore, you can retain how long a document would need to stay in an archive.