We did not look at others due to the OS level authentications and permissions we needed to consider. We wanted a seamless migration and infrastructure that would minimize the cost of transactions. We migrated directly to the latest version combined with Office 365 which met all requirements. With it, we can integrate desktop and cloud project solutions. 

From my past experience with Microsoft, I didn't have to evaluate other options.

SharePoint is much easier to use than OneDrive. We encountered challenges with OneDrive due to permissions and accidental sign-ins, leading to crashes. It connects through email, preventing such issues.

SharePoint is more complex and less intuitive than Wix.com, making it harder to design and create templates.

There are similar solutions, like Lotus Notes/Domino and open source versions.

Open source rarely offers support, and I wouldn’t want to have a systems issue with all of my content locked up.

I believe IT looked at Yammer but felt our culture could just use SP2013 for free first to get our feet wet before investing in another tool. There are no business requirements for an Enterprise Social Network yet so with the pitfalls of using SP2013 out of the box, we are seeing what we actually need vs. what we have.

We looked at NetMax and various Linux offerings.

I evaluated Lotus Notes and HPE Content Manager.

We evaluated Alfresco and Confluence, and then decided on SharePoint.

I was not involved in this process.

I used several products, but sharepoint brought them all together. I used windows file server, linux, file versioners, website to share documents.

I have worked with products similar to SharePoint such as Documentum, and others. They are heavily loaded with a lot of features, which small and medium enterprise banks, catering to anywhere up to 20,000 users, may not require. 

No, client requires use of SharePoint for content management on IT programs and projects.

In choosing options for services we looked at eRoom. eRoom’s interface was primitive and did not provide the functionality we were looking for and integration with Office. It also was not easy to use and it was not easy to empower users to create sites and manage their own security easily. I also believe that the training would have been more in depth with this product, as with Microsoft they have a way of making interfaces similar so you know where to look to find information and menus.

We evaluated multiple alternatives including:

• Oracle UCM
• EMC Documentum
• FileNet IBM
• Alfresco
• Liferay

Based on two selection exercises in two organizations; SharePoint was the best fit solution. The 2nd was EMC Documentum, then Oracle followed by FileNet and Alfresco, with Liveray last.

This wasn't my choice. However, there's nothing truly like SharePoint in the marketplace that I'm aware of.

We have not evaluated any other solution before this one.

We evaluated eleven others.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated too many other options to list. We surveyed over 15 providers/solutions, and no one had a 100% fix for our company. We selected SharePoint based on flexibility, the best score, and that we were able to do our own changes. Some suppliers demanded that they do all the changes, so you would be locked to them if you need changes in the future; the system would become more expensive.

We did a brief overview of the market, and found that 9 years ago, SharePoint was a viable solution. Since then, we’ve settled on using it in very narrow cases, and fill the majority of our needs with custom development.

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

We did evaluate using FileNet as an alternative. We chose SharePoint due to its tighter integration with Microsoft Office.

I compared it against Google's solution.

We evaluated some other products, like Telerik CMS.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated an in-house solution.

At Sonepar, we considered using open source CMS systems, like Drupal and DotNetNuke.

We decided on SharePoint early on.

We evaluated the solutions available at the time. Among others, these were Micro-Level, Business Objects and Hyperion.

We have not evaluated other options.

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.

No other options were evaluated.

We did evaluate other options.

When comparing this solution to other workflow operating systems like Oracle or BP Logix, I give this solution a ten out of ten.

We evaluated Documentum.

We did evaluate a few other options. I know we looked at Jostle which we did adopt for the social-side of our intranet and for the publishing of static articles.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.

We evaluated Atlassian Confluence (we use both products in house for different things).

We did evaluate other products, but I don’t remember the names at this stage.

I was not involved in the decision.

We evaluated Jive and Cisco.

We didn’t look at other options.

We did not evaluate any other options because of corporate requirements.

N/A. This was a pre-existing solution that's been upgraded many times since its first roll out (2003 > 2007 > 2010 > 2013).

Nothing else did this at the time we started up.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options. We chose SharePoint as we had business partners that were already using it, we had exposure to the product that way and liked what we saw.

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

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

Before choosing this product, we explored alternatives such as Documentum from EMC (now spun off to OpenText), Slack, Box, Dropbox and even WordPress and Jive. However, for all-around capabilities that include not just document management, workflows, calendar, task management, blogging, calendars and overall business process management, we deemed SharePoint as the best overall.

WordPress for basic websites or Intranet is great, but there is no direct competitor for the full breadth of SharePoint. However, for narrow sets of functions, Box, Dropbox, Google Drive, Wedoist, Slack, and others offer competition.

We thought about an open source solution, but the features and the support provided wasn’t sufficient to satisfy our organization’s needs.

I didn’t evaluate other products.

No.

We did not look at alternatives.

We did not evaluate other products. However, also invested into WordPress and Kentico CMS under the MS Azure PaaS environment.

Unfortunately there were no alternatives; I didn't choose this product.

Before choosing this product, I also evaluated Confluence and ZenDesk.

Confluence by Atlassian was the only other option that was considered.

In the end, we chose the Microsoft SharePoint solution because we have a Microsoft Gold membership; so the pricing and licensing was greatly reduced for us.

The SharePoint project had already been initiated before I joined the organization. However, since we are only on Foundation, the organization has embarked on a comparison between SharePoint and Confluence. After proper investigation and research, it was decided that both solutions were useful in their own right. Confluence is a collaborative working tool; and SharePoint offered a documentation management solution.

SharePoint and Confluence integrate well with each other. Confluence also connects with SharePoint. The business leaders and decision makers of our organization decided to test the SharePoint solution using Foundation 2013. Based on user feedback and interaction with SharePoint Foundation, they have recently decided to go with the Enterprise version.

We evaluated Alfresco and Liferay Portal.

We did not evaluate any other options.

We did not look at other solutions.

As both the Team Foundation Server and SharePoint are Microsoft products, they can be easily integrated. Thus, we did not evaluate other options.

We considered open source products like Alfresco. We decided to purchase a commercially supported product.

We didn’t look at any alternatives.

SharePoint didn't have a direct competition at the time of our evaluation, mainly due to its deep integration with .NET Framework technologies like Windows Workflow Foundation. Thus, it was our only choice to try.

We didn’t look at alternatives. Integration with TFS was crucial to our teams.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate any other options.

We are looking for increased functionality on SharePoint or to change to something else. We have a CapEx for content management and I'm looking for the best solution for my company.

The most important criterion in selecting a vendor is that the solution gives me value. It should be very easy to integrate with workflow or BPM. I'm looking for a partner and a solution that gives me value.

We considered replacing our SharePoint system with Atlassian Confluence. Although it does offer basic document management, it is not robust enough to meet our document management needs.

SharePoint has built in document management functionality, while Confluence relies on macros and third-party apps. We felt that the risk of relying on potentially unsupported apps outweighed any other benefits.

We still use Confluence as a collaborative work space and will be using the Confluence wikis as our knowledge base solution.

Before choosing this product, I did not evaluate other options.