If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering SharePoint Designer, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?
This solution started as Microsoft FrontPage and was renamed at some time. My advice for anybody who is implementing this tool is to make sure that you understand it. This tool can damage a lot if you don't know what you are doing. If you are only editing your own sites then there is not much damage you can do. However, if you have elevated access then you have to be careful. It is similar in this regard to a registry editor, where if you edit keys outside of your own personal scope then it can cause problems. You can do a lot of damage to your machine. The biggest lesson that I learned when using this solution has to do with planning. When it comes to using this solution, it is much better to plan what you are doing in advance. Just clicking around trying to get things done is inefficient, and you will spend a lot more time than necessary. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
We use the on-premises deployment model. A lot of planning is necessary before deciding on a final solution or a final architecture. Planning is very important prior to implementation. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.
We use the on-premises deployment model. I'd rate the solution three out of ten.
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
We're using the SharePoint 2000 version. The solution makes the work of estimating the requirements pretty difficult. Mainly, it is a very useful tool I can use for small to medium requirements. If you're new to the solution, be aware that Sharepoint can be challenging, so you need to be ready to learn the solution in order to fully use it. Sharepoint involves coding; it's not like other solutions that offer zero coding. Organizations considering implementing it should be made aware of this. If you are considering implementing it, I'd take the time to compare it to what you already have and any other options you are considering so that you are able to choose the solution that will work best for you. There are a lot of features now that are actually offered by competitors. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. If you were talking about the 2016 version, I'd give it a seven out of ten, but the 2013 version I would rate a six.
This product basically has all of the features that I need, but there is no such thing as a perfect solution. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. There are other solutions on the market. Some are more usable than Sharepoint.
I will rate this program a five out of ten. The reason for this is that I would like to be able to use SharePoint Designer without having to buy other third party programs. At this stage, I still have to use other designing webpages because SharePoint Designer doesn't offer all the features I need. You can create beautiful pages, add the list and add a document library, but the solution doesn't offer any complicated designing features. One can only do a few simple designs. Everything has to be coded through either Visual Studio or some other solution. So I hope to see an improvement in the new version of this program. Perhaps they can add different templates where one can add banners, tabs, and lists. And even drag and drop features where one can add permissions. That would be great.
On a scale from one to ten, I rate this solution a seven. I like the user experience level and there were some small issues, but I can't remember what they were. It was a long time ago. If Microsoft will keep on supporting the program, they should fix those small issues.
In terms of advice I would give to others considering implementing the solution, I would say they should adopt the SharePoint Framework and do it with Visual Studio. I'd rate the solution three out of ten.
I've been working with SharePoint version 2013. I would rate it as 7.5 out of ten.
We're using the 2013 version of the solution. The solution has a lot of complexity. That might work for some people, depending on the use case, but for others, that may be a turn-off. I would rate the solution seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, but there are other solutions that are able to better cover my needs.
We use the on-premises deployment solution. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
On a scale of one to ten, I rate this a five because it could be more flexible.