(AARHUS, DENMARK: jboye08) “MOSS is very good for very good in smaller, workgroup environments,” says Alan Pelz-Sharpe, analyst, CMS Watch and his presentation on Evaluating SharePoint. “It’s not traditionally very good for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users.”
CMS Watch’s approach / focus to evaluating MOSS:
Customers that are making a purchase today (or shortly)
Independent, specific advice for end users and buyers
We never work for vendors… and in fact can be (even) ‘rude’ or honest about some products
We have a reputation of being anti-SharePoint; not true, we’re independent and in fact we’ve recommended MOSS to many
Sometimes however MOSS has not always been accurately advertised; not they’re (MS) dishonest, but it (MOSS) not always the best fit for an organization
PROS:
MOSS is really unusual: a lot of different dynamics
Most people are fairly happy with SharePoint
SharePoint is an end-user’s dream with some exceptions; users are usually very happy
For building small collaborative environments, it’s nearly perfect (I’m exaggerating for affect)
File sharing
Team sites
Well priced for small organizations
CONS:
Those that aren’t happy with it are those that use MOSS where it’s not a good fit
Those that aren’t typically happy are those that are in-charge of governance, legal, etc.
Before MOSS there was chaos… now the chaos is more visible with MOSS (and its bringing more visibility to this chaos)
Enterprise content management (ECM) which demands strict controls (compared with Documentum, Oracle, FileNet and IBM)
Very poor at index/search of non-MOSS info
Search results can be unexpected out of the box
Project / task tracking
Social networking
Discussion & collaboration and communication
Trouble consuming its own RSS feeds (authentication issue)
Pricey for larger organizations
Case study example (editor’s note: SharePoint sprawl):
There’s a bank HQ’d in the UK and they have SharePoint… started using it as a test in 2006 and immediately upgraded to MOSS in 2007… and now have 23,000 instances of MOSS… and it’s a massive problem for the bank
The way it was deployed and structured was deplorable… that’s the bank’s fault, not Microsoft’s
“How to bring it under control? I’m not entirely certain…”
MOSS SharePoint history:
Initially a countermove to the success of Lotus Notes
When SharePoint was formally launched in 2003 MS had very low expectations
The initial success was very high… MS was stunned and very pleased
MS managers were stunned… “Why is it such a big success?”
The success was in users deploying it as a light-weight portal
MOSS launched in 2007 and updated to .NET 2.0 / 3.0 as a development platform
Recurring Threats:
Separation between underlying “free” Windows platform and richer portal product with extra services, for a fee
If you’re an MS enterprise client, you will get most MOSS services for free
Traditional disconnect between SharePoint and .NET (mostly resolved in 2007) (e.g. MS is very large but very much like a college campus with many different groups and departments… that don’t necessarily talk to each other… and there are times that products get ‘out-of-sync’ with each other
Endemic confusion about what resides in SharePoint and what does not (and licensing implications)
MOSS is very good for very good in smaller, workgroup environments (it’s not traditionally very good for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users) (e.g. Oracle on the other hand focuses on larger enterprises and are traditionally “terrible” at the workgroup level deployments)
MOSS has to run on a MS technology stack (.NET, Windows Server, SQL server)
“I’m not really convinced that there really is any business intelligence (in MOSS)… though MS says there is.”
Current SharePoint Product Universe:
WSS
Foundation components, free with Windows
Basic collaborative features
MOSS
Fee based server product that extends WSS
Advanced features like CMS, personalization, forms processing and Excel services
Some enterprise features not included
SharePoint Search
Search engine for MOSS
Can crawl a number of different content sources, including Exchange (email)
MOSS Standard can only index 500,000 pages
Forms Server
Form rendering and processing (“One of the best features of MOSS… I love this. Really good value add.”)
Used in conjunction with InfoPath to deliver electronic forms via the Web
Still retain interactive attributes provided via InfoPath
Key functions:
Functional capabilities:
Enhanced search
Business data catalog
Excel services
Forms services
Shared services: farm-level services
User import/management
Search engaging configuration
Basic usage reporting
Profile-based site for individual users
MySite
Both profile and personalizable home page
Somewhat controversial
Actually provisions entire site collection
Things that can affect pricing:
Extent of external connectors and licenses for “Internet Site” licenses
“Enterprise vs. Standard CALs (licensing)”
Search
Forms
Implementation costs
Customization costs
Systems integration
ALSO READ: The SharePoint Plan (MOSS)