We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is the #8 ranked solution in our list of top Content Collaboration Platforms. It is most often compared to Amazon WorkDocs: Microsoft Office SharePoint Server vs Amazon WorkDocs

What is Microsoft Office SharePoint Server?

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) is a Microsoft software portal based on the ASP.NET framework. MOSS facilitates file sharing and collaboration, social networking, Web databases and Web publishing. It is hosted by Microsoft Windows Server and is accessible through Microsoft Office or the Web.

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is also known as Office SharePoint Server, MS Office SharePoint Server.

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Buyer's Guide

Download the Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: October 2021

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Customers

Del Monte Foods, Unicredit Leasing, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council, Nokia Czech Republic, Perkins Eastman, JLL, ICA, óxito Software, Dorset Software, PKP Cargo, Arcapita Bank B.S.C., AVE CZ, Chesapeake Energy

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server pricing:
  • "There are some aggressive discounts offered by Microsoft for organizations that are not for profit, which we are, and it makes it quite attractive to consider."
  • "One of the reasons why we don't recommend the cloud version of SharePoint is the cost. With the on premise version, you pay for the license once. For the cloud version, there is a recurring fee. It is very expensive. They expect everyone to pay $20 or $30 per user per month."
  • "It can be expensive for on-premises deployments, especially when you have to support SQL Server as your backend database. That's where the cost comes into play. SQL Server has its own licensing, which Microsoft keeps on changing. Therefore, it can become costly. In the earlier versions of SharePoint, version 2007 or 2010, they had an express version where the SQL Server licensing was free. It wasn't like a full-blown SharePoint. It was only a slimmed-down version. It used to be whatever your hardware costs. You would install the free software and work with it, but you were very limited in what you could do in SharePoint. If you wanted the SharePoint Enterprise Server with all the bells and whistles, then you had to pay more to get the SQL Server license based on the number of users or servers. The subscription model is different for cloud deployments. Licensing is per user and per month. The cost also depends on the storage required. If you have a lot of sites or documents, then you need to expand it based on your needs."
  • "Pricing plans may be flexible depending on volume usage and your corporate relationship with Microsoft."

Microsoft Office SharePoint Server Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
RicardoPedro
Northern Europe IT Business Intelligence Manager at Adecco
Real User
Top 5
Stable, integrates well with Teams, and has flexible and helpful support

Pros and Cons

  • "The support from Microsoft is very quick and they are very proactive."
  • "I would like to see the integration with Teams reinforced."

What is our primary use case?

In SharePoint, you have two functionalities from my perspective. One is from a newsletter perspective and the other is from a team perspective For example; you have the SharePoint Teams and then you have the SharePoint Newsletter.

SharePoint Teams allows you to create a concept as a team, whereas SharePoint you create a workspace in Power BI and also you create a channel in Microsoft Teams. That's the beauty of the full component of Office 365. When you create things, you also can expand the same functionality for the additional applications that are out of there. The SharePoint News is used when you want to create newsletter updates on SharePoint.

On the point of the design is a design capability. They're there for you to put hyperlinks to other pages if it was your HyperText Markup Language or web page, so the idea or the service is to do a little bit in that direction. A good advantage is that you can create lists in SharePoint.

Basically, you have a full list and the beauty of that is that you can have a Power app that works with it. For example; you could develop a Power app that could be connected to that same SharePoint list. Your Power app will be your front end, where you input your data. Then your SharePoint will get that data into that SharePoint list. It means that you could use the Power BI connected to that SharePoint list to develop your front end, including the visualization of your reports.

Then, you could embed that Power BI report inside of the SharePoint for the end-users to consume. Inside of that SharePoint, they could see the report and they could see the information. Essentially, it is the full suite of Office 365 with the advantage of using the SharePoint database as your list. This is an example of one way that you could use it.

What is most valuable?

One of the strongest points for Microsoft applications is that they have a very big community.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see the integration with Teams reinforced. If you could have some SharePoint pages inside of teams, I think it could be useful. If you want to use data as a repository then you can have it there. That is one way, but also it depends on what Microsoft is trying to do. If they are planning to disaggregate SharePoint and just use Teams as the mainframe or they still want to keep it. I think that if they can bring some of the key components of what useful in both products then I think that can help the users.

More and more, people are starting to try to find one unique channel where they can have everything in one place. You can still have a lot of applications that you can use, but you still have one interface. That's what I think Microsoft Teams is trying to do, which is to give you one interface where you can use it for communication, control, to check how is your team behaving, and to have web meetings.

There is more usability from an end-user perspective to continue to use the full scope of Microsoft products. This included integrating products as much as possible.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Microsoft products for between 25 and 30 years.

Since I started working with Microsoft, one of the tools that we began with was Excel. Then we started with Word and have always been using these tools. Then, I jumped for BI, and after that, we started to use SharePoint for other things.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

SharePoint Server is scalable.

The company has a presence in 60 countries and all of the members of the organization can use it. I don't know how many people are in each country, but I would say it's all of the organization. Whenever we hire somebody, SharePoint is available for them to use.

How are customer service and technical support?

Microsoft has a huge community that provides support and tips to go through the components and how to supply them.

I think that the technical support is good. I've never had issues with SharePoint or raised any tickets related to SharePoint, but I have had contact with Microsoft support for other products such as Power BI. 

The support from Microsoft is very quick and they are very proactive. If they cannot solve the problem within your timezone, they will escalate it to another timezone. They are completely flexible in that way.

Another really good point is that even if I open a ticket in Europe, but it's related to someone in Latin America, they will call that person in the Latin American timezone from the Latin American team. It is flexible and promotes collaboration.

How was the initial setup?

I am not a Microsoft Office 365 administrator but I think it's not complex. I think that for certain companies, it may be a little bit complex or difficult for them to understand what the Office 365 package contains.

It is based on the licensing perspective. You can have an E3 license where you have both components and then you can have an E5 license and then you have additional components there. But in some cases, I think it should be more.

I think for the administrators, it will be good for them to have visibility to say, what will be the cost to have Power apps? Or, what will be the cost to have just only Power BI? Or, what is the cost of the full breakdown of all the components? What do the components offer you and give you?

If you are not an IT person and looking at opening your own company and you want to set up some components or Microsoft, you want to make sure that you have all the suites that you need to drive your business. From the perspective of someone that is not an IT person, I think will be useful to have some documentation that could help them in good guidance to, make the best selection and the best choices, because that they will have a better understanding. They would know things like Power Automate would help them to create their own process flow and have their own reports. They would know that they don't need to buy separate applications. It is possible to have everything in one package but sometimes, it's the lack of visibility or lack of communication that prevents this.

On the topic of on-premises versus cloud deployment, we have both because it's not only about a global company. We also have regional countries. On a global aspect, it's on the cloud, whereas on the regional aspect, it's on-premises. In these cases, they are still planning to move to the cloud.

When you look at Office 365, it's on the cloud, fully and independently of the country. However, there are other components that are not Microsoft and those that are on-premises, we are planning to also move to Azure.

What other advice do I have?

This is a product that I can recommend, although I will recommend it depending on what purpose they want it for. SharePoint has two ways it can be used. One is if you want to use it with the full suite of Office 365 with the purpose to create a small database or a small input of data, but also to create some pages, or if you need to store some information, and so on. I think it offers the advantages you need, if you are a small company, or even if you are a big company, but it depends on what you want to use it for. For example, you might want to use it as a communication channel. This works well.

However, it is important to remember that the suite of Microsoft is growing, so it means that more and more, I think that that component is not going to be used. I think it's still going to be used, but I don't think he's going to be fully used. Instead, I think people will focus more on the Power Automate components, such as Power Apps, Power Flow, Power BI, the Robotics component, and then Microsoft Teams.

The reason why Microsoft Teams is so well used at the moment is because of all of this situation with COVID. People had to find a platform where they could connect with others without having to break down. What is really funny about it is that if try to you use Skype, and you try to use My Teams, you will find that My Teams is more stable than Skype. They are still two components, part of the Microsoft suite. But, the way that they built My Teams, I think they got whatever they needed from Skype and then incorporated it into teams. Then they expanded the functionality of Teams to be more secure to be more stable.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PaulOuimette
Director of Operations at NEOnet Inc
Real User
Top 5
Helpful alerts, historic file version audit capability, and full integration with Office Main Apps; Microsoft continues to evolve user interface and integration

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the "Alert Me", which provides the ability to set an alert when content is either added or changed and that the alerts can be either real-time or aggregated for the day or the week."
  • "The ability to preview files in different formats should be expanded to include formats such as embedded postscript (EPS), AutoCAD, and Adobe Acrobat PDF."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use of this solution is for in-house staff. We have six SharePoint sites, each secured autonomously for access to content, and we have not at this time shared outside of our domain. When we have consultants or partners that need access then we provide them a local account.

How has it helped my organization?

One of the value adds from SharePoint is the version history of any given document, which when we first began using it was, I believe, ten versions by default and now it's gone to over one hundred with no extra effort. If somebody modifies something then you can go back a hundred versions of that document to see who did what and at what time. I think it even tracks on which IP address the changes were made. If there is a concern about rogue access using an authenticated account, we can go back in time and research that.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the "Alert Me", which provides the ability to set an alert on a SharePoint folder or file when the content is either added or changed and that the alerts can be either real-time or aggregated for the day or the week.  One or several team members can be informed thus helping in near real-time updates to the team and actions where required.

The integration with Office 365, and the ability to edit the files using any of the products in the suite is very valuable.  Recent update to

What needs improvement?

If you're a legacy, long-term user of SharePoint, there are challenges moving forward to the newer user experience that works with groups. It is a complex migration process and there's a lot of manual effort involved.

If a file is moved or renamed then the links to it are broken. Ideally, a unique internal and persistent identifier should be used to access files to prevent this problem. When you start building a large repository of several hundred thousand or millions of documents that represent decades of history, you may want to enhance the name of something that was really poorly described in the past. However, if there's an external link to a website or an external link that you might've saved within your own office to access that content, it becomes annoying when you break things. It would be nice if they would abstract that so that it's an internal structure that uniquely identifies the document version, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the file name or its location within SharePoint.

I know that there is some degree of workflow in SharePoint, but there isn't easy awareness of what that means and how to easily utilize it. I think there can be some enhancements done there to make it a lot easier for people to, for example, migrate a paper process to be a workflow for permissions or authorization, thereby leveraging the SharePoint platform.

The ability to preview files in different formats should be expanded to include formats such as embedded postscript (EPS), AutoCAD, and Adobe Acrobat PDF. You can open them online, but that's an extra step and it would be nice to have a thumbnail to quickly review the content in that folder. That, to me, is a missing opportunity. These are known standards that file managers can work with.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution since 2015.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is like any hosted service on the cloud. We have not had any outages from a SharePoint perspective, but there is always the risk that if connectivity to the cloud fails on the worldwide web then there may be some concerns. Right now we are exploring a mechanism by which we can back up our content and we're looking at a third-party solution from Veeam.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is very scalable. In our current case, we're using less than twenty-five accounts, but I have some colleagues using the same deployment approach with hundreds of accounts and from what I've experienced using their access, I don't see the difference as a user. So the responsiveness when there are larger or fewer accesses seems to be minimal.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In prior employment, I have utilized the on-premises deployment of SharePoint. However, with my current employer, we had discreet local file shares through network-attached storage that we migrated to cloud services storage for SharePoint.

In this organization, we used DocuShare from Xerox prior to SharePoint.

The pros from a Xerox DocuShare perspective is that it abstracts the access of a file through a unique internal identifier so that no matter where the document is moved or renamed, there is an existing saved link to it that never breaks. With SharePoint, if you change the location of a file or you change its name, you are breaking those links. That to me is a weakness of SharePoint and definitely something that's much more robust and well thought out from Xerox.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's answering through a wizard a few questions such as the time zone and the amount of space you want to allocate to SharePoint. You're pretty well right off the gate and ready to use it in less than ten minutes.

What about the implementation team?

We performed the deployment ourselves, driven mostly by myself, and it was not a complex process.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

There are some aggressive discounts offered by Microsoft for organizations that are not for profit, which we are, and it makes it quite attractive to consider.

What other advice do I have?

We have not yet migrated to the new user experience, but we have recently enabled some new user interface views just to make it look more modern. It provides a nicer alphabetical view of folder content and provides a more elegant menu bar at the top of the screen to give you more control.

I like DocuShare from Xerox; however, because of the integration of documents stored in SharePoint to be edited by any of the Office Suite products, that overpowers and is a greater good than what DocuShare brought to the company. It is a compromise, but the compromise is a positive one because of how pervasive the use of Office is around the world.

They've been aggressive, being Microsoft, in evolving some of their other offerings like Forms Online, and evolutions to OneDrive in the cloud. SharePoint has been somewhat stable other than the evolution recently with groups, but other than that it's not clear how they're really strengthening it. There may be some opportunities as well to improve the document previews. A lot of people might have graphic file formats that they want to be able to preview but are currently unsupported.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2021.
541,108 professionals have used our research since 2012.
NanfaKumswa
CTO/Owner at AVAILSYS LTD
Real User
Top 10
Good document management and the third-party add-ons enable us to achieve workflows

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features for us are their document management list and hybrid forms. and We also use third party ad-dons to achieve workflows and other recent apps."
  • "I think these tools do a pretty good job. There is only one area of improvement. Maybe Microsoft can invest a little bit more into the ease at which integration can be done with other third party applications."

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features for us are their document management list and hybrid forms. We also use third-party add-ons to achieve workflows and other recent apps.

What needs improvement?

One of the reasons why we don't recommend the cloud version of SharePoint is the cost. With the on-premise version, you pay for the license once. For the cloud version, there is a recurring fee.

The truth is there are some places where SharePoint is pretty decent for the thing that it does. Microsoft has a very good product. It's difficult to find room for improvement because you can get add-ons that support it. With SharePoint, if you are not subscribed to the SharePoint environment libraries, you can probably get third party tools that you can add on to it. It's difficult to see other tools that allow people to collaborate on documents and data in these libraries. 

I think these tools do a pretty good job. There is only one area of improvement. Maybe Microsoft can invest a little bit more into the ease at which integration can be done with other third-party applications.

I know that Microsoft released SharePoint 2016, but I don't know if there is SharePoint 2019. We have only worked with the higher version of SharePoint since 2013. I don't know how much they have done in the area of integration. I think integration is a very important area of focus for SharePoint because it's very easy for SharePoint to become the go-to area, where everybody in your organization can come. Your costs, documents, sites, lists, and data can all be in one place. I would like to see them make it easier for people who are not using Exchange to connect to different data sources.

For example, a lot of people are using Google Apps. If I'm using Google Apps, there are plugins that we can just plug into SharePoint automatically to share documents and Google spreadsheets seamlessly. A Google spreadsheet can be imported into a SharePoint library. You can also point a SharePoint library to a Google spreadsheet, or the data source coming out of Google spreadsheet.

Integration also should include tools like Tableau, Salesforce, and some of the top software out there. It's not good enough to have website integration. That's not enough. You want to make an integration where Microsoft can build a wizard and you can just click a few times to create the integration. Then, just enter your username and password and point to the URL.
Those custom integrations are crucial, especially for smaller businesses. For large organizations that are deploying SharePoint in the enterprise, they already have an IT department, resources, and tons of administrators. They already have resources that can quickly build web services, called drivers or connectors. For small organizations, however, it would be good for Microsoft to invest in connectors. Microsoft can build and provide connectors for some of the more frequently used integrations, such as PayPal, Google Apps, Salesforce, SAP, etc. I think that would be great.

There is another area that Microsoft can improve on. I don't know what they have done with InfoPath. I think that's still a mystery. There's still a very big opportunity for form development and apps development framework that you can use quickly. Otherwise, Microsoft is telling everybody to go and buy two licenses to do serious forms of development. I think that's going to be a problem. I know that they're trying to encourage their partners to build those tools. However, workflows and easier to use and more robust forms infrastructure on top of SharePoint would go a long way. It is very expensive. They expect everyone to pay $20 or $30 per user per month. Microsoft can definitely help if they can build some of those capabilities, especially for people that want to invest in SharePoint. You're not investing much in to get some of the functionalities out.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using this solution for eight years.

How was the initial setup?

Most of our customers are enterprise customers. For enterprise customers deploying SharePoint, the setup is quite complex. If you don't know what you're doing, you can get yourself into trouble very quickly if you have a lot of data or users. It's very simple when you have a pair of small deployments. Then you can just click next a couple of times to engineer a solution. It's quite complex, however, if you have lots of users or you have terabytes of content. If you have a complex deployment, it gets very tricky and you have to get people who know what they're doing to be able to deploy even though there are challenges.

That's another big problem with Microsoft SharePoint because there was nobody to warn us and tell us at the beginning that, for enterprise deployment, we needed to think very carefully about certain things. It took us some time to build the competencies to understand the tricky areas. We had to learn what to do about performance and so many different things on an enterprise level.

The bottom line is that SharePoint is indeed for complex deployments. You just have to get the right team to be able to deploy it properly.

What other advice do I have?

It's difficult to rate in general because there are so many different parts of SharePoint. As a personal collaboration, I would rate it as eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
CH
Management Consultant, Technical Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
MSP
Top 10
A stable solution for document and records management

Pros and Cons

  • "Document management and records management features are the most valuable."
  • "It is a bit restrictive to develop in the cloud version. A lot of features are in the cloud now, and you have to develop on the outside. As far as the platform and the programming side of things are concerned, it is moving more towards configuration management rather than programming. When we are doing solutions, we are basically just configuring it to make solutions happen rather than actually using the Visual Studio code and developing from scratch in the cloud. It is almost like creating an app. You have created an app for your phone, but the app doesn't really sit on your phone. It sits somewhere on a server, and the database sits on another server. The app is just pulling and pushing information. The whole development has changed. We used to install things directly on the server and then run the application from the server. Now, it is more of a modular architecture."

What is most valuable?

Document management and records management features are the most valuable.

What needs improvement?

It is a bit restrictive to develop in the cloud version. A lot of features are in the cloud now, and you have to develop on the outside. As far as the platform and the programming side of things are concerned, it is moving more towards configuration management rather than programming. When we are doing solutions, we are basically just configuring it to make solutions happen rather than actually using the Visual Studio code and developing from scratch in the cloud. It is almost like creating an app. You have created an app for your phone, but the app doesn't really sit on your phone. It sits somewhere on a server, and the database sits on another server. The app is just pulling and pushing information. The whole development has changed. We used to install things directly on the server and then run the application from the server. Now, it is more of a modular architecture.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Microsoft Office SharePoint Server for seven years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is pretty good. It also depends on whether the implementor has configured it right or not. Sticking to the best practice, that is, trying to use what you can out of the box, is always the best way. A lot of companies start selling custom solutions, but when there is a fix, a patch, or an update, it could easily break any of the applications below it.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their technical support is a little different. It could be challenging. The problem with Microsoft is that they have different tiers. Unless you are a premium partner, you are usually dealing with a third party. Microsoft has these third-party companies, and they are basically just reading off a script. In the company I work for, we have to have certain certifications for Microsoft. We are like a gold partner where we get immediate support from an actual Microsoft representative. If you are just a company, you will usually deal with the first-line technical support, which is usually a third party.

How was the initial setup?

It is usually a multi-tier environment where you have more than one computer or server for different parts. You have an application server, a database server, and a web front end.
You install the Windows Server, databases, and SQL Server. There are a lot of pieces. With on-premises deployments, there is a lot more hardware, and you have to worry about everything. In cloud deployments, you don't have that responsibility. Security is taken care of in cloud deployments.

Deployment duration depends on the number of users and the size of your implementation. It could take a year or so for big companies. Generally, everything gets scaled out as you go along, but it all depends on the solution or the project. Deployment is obviously quicker with the cloud version. It goes a lot quicker, and it is a lot more secure.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It can be expensive for on-premises deployments, especially when you have to support SQL Server as your backend database. That's where the cost comes into play. SQL Server has its own licensing, which Microsoft keeps on changing. Therefore, it can become costly. 

In the earlier versions of SharePoint, version 2007 or 2010, they had an express version where the SQL Server licensing was free. It wasn't like a full-blown SharePoint. It was only a slimmed-down version. It used to be whatever your hardware costs. You would install the free software and work with it, but you were very limited in what you could do in SharePoint. If you wanted the SharePoint Enterprise Server with all the bells and whistles, then you had to pay more to get the SQL Server license based on the number of users or servers.

The subscription model is different for cloud deployments. Licensing is per user and per month. The cost also depends on the storage required. If you have a lot of sites or documents, then you need to expand it based on your needs.

What other advice do I have?

A majority of enterprises are moving to the cloud now. However, a lot of on-premises deployment companies are still reluctant to go to the cloud because the data centers are all across the world. When you have different privacy laws, as compared to being subjected to the law of just one country, there is always a conflict. The nice thing about the cloud is that you don't have to worry about the hardware and backups etc. 

There is a lot more flexibility in the cloud, especially for mobile development. For instance, with an Office 365 subscription, you get access to a lot of apps. One of the apps is called Power Apps, which allows you to connect to any data source. It could be any connector or application. It could be an on-premises database or Salesforce. You just tie it in and then give a mobile front end. It is just so easy, whereas you don't have access to all this in on-premises deployments.

To implement a SharePoint server, it will be helpful to hire a partner who is experienced and can basically help in planning it out rather than straight away jumping to installation.

I would rate Microsoft Office SharePoint Server a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
BJ
Senior Product Manager at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Reseller
Top 5
Collaboration works, but the product is behind in feature development and its aging GUI

Pros and Cons

  • "It is a decent tool for collaboration, especially if you are already using other Office products."
  • "The GUI is outdated."
  • "The product is behind in development and lacks some features."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is mostly collaboration. We use it for document sharing and things of that nature.  

What is most valuable?

I would say the collaborative part of the product is the most valuable. You can just send a link to to content to other people. You can get stuff done in one place and keep it centralized rather than attaching documents into a emails. Working this way just makes the job function a little bit easier.  

What needs improvement?

The product has a lot of room for improvement. A lot. The UIs are really clunky and Microsoft needs to fix that. Their access control is horrible and they need to fix that as well. I think overall that the look-and-feel and usability are really 10 years old. They have not done anything to improve and update it over that time. It is a good product. But updating it is definitely something they should look into. I do not know what their strategy is for lagging with the redesign of that.  

It needs better usability and enhanced features. I think SharePoint does allow you to create websites, but if you compare it with the other providers like even Google sites or Google pages, those solutions make it so much easier to create those pages. SharePoint is not up to speed on that functionality. I think that is something they can probably easily do.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using SharePoint for a pretty long time. It has been around somewhere between five and ten years.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I think the stability of SharePoint is okay and not all too bad. If you compare it to Outlook —which I think is still not as stable as it should be after all this time — SharePoint is fine by comparison. Stability is generally not an issue.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I would not know about scalability directly because I use the product and I am not involved in scaling the usage.  

I know that we have about 100,000 people in our company using the solution, and many of those will be using it on a daily basis. Certainly, it can handle high volume.  

I do not know if we have any plans on increasing the usage of Office SharePoint Server. I am not an IT person and I am not involved in that area of planning. Somebody else does everything to maintain the product and then I just use it for my document management.  

How are customer service and technical support?

I do not really have the type of position where I would be contacting support over any issues I have with SharePoint. I know that Microsoft does not really have impressive support.  

How was the initial setup?

When it comes to the installation, Microsoft has made that fast and efficient. You really do not have to do anything special to get going with the product. Everything is browser-based.  

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I think we have a corporate license for SharePoint. We have a special arrangement with Microsoft because we are a reseller for pretty much most of the Microsoft products. Whatever our pricing is will probably not be like the standard model.  

What other advice do I have?

I think SharePoint is a good tool. This is especially true if you are in the Microsoft ecosystem — as in being an Office 365 user — then SharePoint is definitely something you should look at as a solution for collaboration and file sharing. It is well integrated within the Office suite.  

They also have a thing called Microsoft Teams. I do not know how they are planning to use both these solutions in the field because Microsoft Teams also does quite a bit of the same stuff that SharePoint does. There is a lot of overlap.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate Office SharePoint Server somewhere in the middle of the pack for products like it. It is definitely not the worst, but it is also definitely not the best.  

I would only give it only a four-out-of-ten because I really think they need to make a significant effort to bring it up to par.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller
Basil Ndolo
Product Development Manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 5
Collaboration is key for us and this fits our requirements very well

Pros and Cons

  • "The collaboration, the ability for multiple users to work on a single document."
  • "The areas around security, such as protection, need to be included."

What is our primary use case?

I'm a product development manager and we are resellers of Microsoft Office SharePoint Server. 

What is most valuable?

I like the collaboration, the ability for multiple users to work on a single document and be able to firstly collaborate and share notes about the document, as well as being able to work on the document without losing the information. Previously, there was little control over who had the latest document and this was a big challenge for us, trying to consolidate all of the aspects together. This provides a way for us to work together. It's really important, collaboration is one of the key reasons we have the software.

What needs improvement?

The areas around security, such as protection and things like that have not been available, and I think the product could be improved in that area, particularly when you are scanning documents from the scanners for sharing. IBM has got the capability in their content management solution, but SharePoint doesn't have it. It's an area where the competition already has those features, so including it would go a long way to ensuring that the software is at least above the requirements. 

I'd like to see security protection as an additional feature. I'd also like to see features on AI, on artificial intelligence. I know IBM has a product and their mobile capture application that is scalable on Android, so iOS uses the AI to really help you capture a document using your phone. So whenever you're taking the photo of the document, AI is available to crop through the document to auto-check for you, and it captures the angle for that document just using your phone. It uses AI to read documents such as invoices, and it's able to auto-capture your invoice number, the date, etc. All of this is AI-enabled, so it is AI that is reading the invoice and getting key parameters from the document such as the invoice number, the date, the purchase amount, and it populates this in the content management. This is a feature that I'd really like to see in SharePoint, and their use of AI to help in content management terms.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for about four years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable product. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's a scalable solution but the competition also has software that's really scalable. That's all I can compare it to. 

How are customer service and technical support?

We generally get our support from a different business partner and not from Microsoft directly. From Microsoft, the support normally takes longer than we need and it's not a route we appreciate. We prefer getting support from an IBM business partner, it takes less time. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Of course the price could be lower. The competition has a much more expensive product, but in terms of the features that are available, they also offer more. In my opinion, the price of SharePoint is fine because it's relative to what the competition has and in terms of the features the competition is offering. Here in Africa, cost is a big factor in making decisions. I would say almost 70% of organizations will look at cost first, and then probably 25% will look at the features the product offers. The cost is really a big factor. Then there's the question of whether it's open sourced.

What other advice do I have?

Given the amount of time I've spent using enterprise product management solutions, Microsoft really ensures that their software is easy to use. There is readily available documentation. Support can take a while and we had to pay for it from another source, but the knowledge base for the product is really good. The community around the products is great, not just locally but even on the internet. You find user groups and communities that are using the application. 

I would rate this solution an eight based on how easy it is to use.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
PR
SharePoint Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Easy to implement and configure with very good customer service

Pros and Cons

  • "The implementation and configuring of the resolution are very easy in the online version."
  • "The solution needs to have more flexibility. The classic version had more flexibility, however, the modern version has many more limitations."

What is our primary use case?

With SharePoint, we have done multiple types of projects. It's a complete ECM, Enterprise Content Management piece. We have implemented something like Power App forms for big oil and gas companies based out of Houston. Power App forms for outages can work in offline mode, which is helpful. We also use it to work on tablets and mobile phones as well and that kind of stuff.

What is most valuable?

There's a lot of features that are quite useful. Building Flow and Power Apps is great. Eventually, we started to use it for platforms too, however, now it's gone, it's not there anymore. SharePoint Online, both classic and modern versions, we have worked with extensively and so we know it very well.

The implementation and configuring of the resolution are very easy in the online version.

What needs improvement?

Microsoft is working to improve the solution daily. They're always adding more features and functionalities.

The solution needs to have more flexibility. The classic version had more flexibility, however, the modern version has many more limitations.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution since 2007.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is pretty good. The online version doesn't have any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or fail. It also doesn't need any infrastructure or virtual machine as it's all completely online and the cloud keep it very stable. You don't need a backup because it is backed up by Microsoft.

How are customer service and technical support?

As a Microsoft partner, we get fantastic customer service. We're quite satisfied with their level of service.

How was the initial setup?

While the solution was not complex to set up, I did find that it had a medium level of complexity, so it wasn't quite straightforward. The online version is a bit easier to manage than the on-premise version.

What about the implementation team?

We're an end-to-end service. We provide implementation services to our clients.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Our customers handle the licensing costs. The pricing varies from customer to customer. Some, for example, might have Enterprise Agreements, or EAs, and that pricing is different.

What other advice do I have?

We are a Microsoft Gold partner. I don't use the solution myself. I'm a consultant. I suggest solutions such as these to my clients.

If our clients, for example, are on Office 365 or on-premise and they want to migrate, that is where we give guidance. We'll ask: Why not move online? Why not use SharePoint Online, rather than using the on-premise version? What are the pros and cons of both? Then, if they would like to move forward and migrate, we can handle implementation for them.

We use the solution as a suite altogether, and SharePoint is part of it. It also has Teams, Power Apps, Flow, etc. It's all part of the Microsoft Office offering.

We used to use the on-premise version, however, since somewhere between 2010 and 2013 we've been using the online version of the solution. Most users are no longer interested in maintaining infrastructures if they don't have to.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
NR
Senior Project Manager at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Enables us to connect with people working from home and we are able to share our documents online

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is that it is very usable. I can navigate it, I can have a media call, I can have a call with my project team, so we can chat with every team kind of like WhatsApp. Any time there are projects or other things, we can chat in a secure way. It's automation-specific secure."
  • "The user interface needs improvement because there is a lot of stuff in there. I use five to eight navigation buttons. It should be more user-friendly. Frequently used menu items should be arranged in a proper way. That would be helpful."

What is our primary use case?

It's really good because with its collaboration we are able to connect with people and we are able to share our documents online. We are also able to share on the fly when we have a call with the Microsoft Teams.

It is really helpful now because, with COVID, everyone is working from home. This product is very useful for us. We can chat and visit any time using Teams.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is that it is very usable. I can navigate it, I can have a media call, I can have a call with my project team, so we can chat with every team kind of like WhatsApp. Any time there are projects or other things, we can chat in a secure way. It's automation-specific secure. 

What needs improvement?

The user interface needs improvement because there is a lot of stuff in there. I use five to eight navigation buttons. It should be more user-friendly. Frequently used menu items should be arranged in a proper way. That would be helpful.

For how long have I used the solution?

We implemented it three years ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. We don't have any issues because even though I work from home, many people connect to Teams and are using the product in multiple ways. We don't see any kind of performance issue or any other issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Because it's a cloud service when we add more users the product is scalable. We didn't have any kind of performance issues. We have around 10,000 users. There are many different roles that use it for day to day activities and communication purposes.

We don't require any people for maintenance but for troubleshooting, we have four to five dedicated staff members. 

We do have plans to increase usage. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. It is user-friendly.

We go through the tutorial and you will be able to do everything. The only problem is when we are migrating from legacy to Microsoft. There are a lot of problems in this there, those things are worked out by Microsoft.

It took almost six months to roll up.

What other advice do I have?

We move from one location to another location and we work with the clients across the globe. This product is useful because when I go to the client place I can use my credentials, I can log in and I can share whatever I want to share from SharePoint Server. It is flexible.

I would absolutely recommend it. It is a very collaborative tool and we believe in Microsoft. We trust it because they keep on upgrading the latest versions from the security purchase. I know the usability is good and also the costs are less compared to the other products.

There is a limitation of 200 people for the conference feature. That limit should be raised.

I would rate it nine out of ten. 

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner