Evaluating SharePoint for larger enterprises
I just finished up my session at the J.
Boye Philadelphia conference. Speaking in the SharePoint track, I was able
to interact with a number of the attendees, getting great insight into SharePoint
implementations across very different businesses. Folks from companies like
Wyeth, WestJet,
and Ikea were either implementing
SharePoint or in the early stages of planning for an implementation.
Here’s what I heard, directly or indirectly, from the attendees:
Most attendees “owned” SharePoint through an existing licensing vehicle
like an Enterprise
Agreement with Microsoft. In about a third of the cases, this created
an advantage for SharePoint when evaluating portal products (I’ve heard this
described as, “we already own SharePoint, so why not use it”). However, it was
also occasionally true that these same organizations also owned other content
management products. One enterprise in particular owned (and used) BEA and RedDot,
but decided to replace both products and implement SharePoint after a full-blown
evaluation, assisted by Prescient
Digital. While Oracle’s Stellent tools (now a part of Oracle’s Universal
Content Management suite) was attractive (WestJet preferred the content
contribution features of Oracle UCM), the cost difference and overall functional
breadth were in SharePoint’s favor.
Larger organizations are struggling with real or perceived scalability
challenges. One attendee was rolling out My Sites to 50,000 employees.
While technically possible (Microsoft has nearly 100,000 in their environment),
the global nature of the implementation, performance limitations related to
content database sizes, and site collection limits within a SharePoint applications
were causing them headaches. Microsoft is public about both hard
and soft SharePoint limits, but larger enterprises will have to plan and
architect carefully to create the right solution.
Some attendees were surprised by the file size limits in SharePoint.
Here again, Microsoft has been public about size limits (see previous bullet),
but with more and more organizations dealing with rich media (or simply very
large files), a 2 Gb restriction is a real constraint. To be sure, the issue
is actually the result of a BLOB
size limitation in SQL Server. Unfortunately, SharePoint is only compatible
with SQL Server, so you can’t simply use another database platform to avoid
the limit. Interestingly, Microsoft has a “solution” to this problem, which
was first introduced in a hot fix and then later through service pack 1. They
called it the “External
BLOB Storage provider.” Unfortunately, this feature got little to no public
visibility. In the latest “Inside SharePoint” on TechNet, Pav Cherney discusses
how to take advantage of this “new” provider to create
an external storage mechanism for SharePoint. You can also read more technical
detail about the provider in Todd
Carter’s blog as well as on Clever
Workarounds (a.k.a., Paul Culmsee); neither blog author has a lot of positive
things to say (apart from initial excitement at the possibilities), but I agree
with them that it was a promising step forward — if perhaps only a half-hearted
attempt.
SharePoint is not a favorite for public-facing website publishing.
The truth is that SharePoint has some serious shortcomings in the WCM space,
but if you’re using SharePoint elsewhere in your enterprise, I think it should
be considered (assuming you don’t have complex requirements). However, SharePoint’s
deficiencies in the WCM category were never more obvious than after seeing Web
Idol contest. WCM vendors like eZ,
Ektron and SilverStripe
did 6 minute demos of their tools in semi-real life scenarios. These demos highlighted
that Microsoft will have to really get in the game if it hopes to compete in
the WCM space. From user-friendly, AJAX-driven contribution interfaces to impressive
unstructured content import capabilities, it seems as if Microsoft has been
asleep at the WCM wheel.
Subscribers to our SharePoint
Report 2009 know that SharePoint is not a best-in-class tool in many categories.
Our research also delves into some important considerations and gotchas if you
want to roll out SharePoint across the enterprise.
At the same time, SharePoint benefits greatly from Microsoft
licensing deals with existing customers, it’s sheer breadth, ease of use
and it’s unbeatable (almost)
integration with the Office products. Combine these attributes with what is
probably the largest ISV, developer, and customer communities of virtually any
player in the broad portal space, and you have a powerful incentive to consider
SharePoint as a part of a portal solution.
While I’m hoping the upcoming 2010 version will improve the overall platform,
I can’t help but think that there’s still a lot of room for improvement. Unfortunately,
even Microsoft doesn’t have nearly enough time, money, and/or resources fill
in all of the shortfalls. If there was ever a time where other vendors have
a shot at wresting SharePoint out of the catbird’s seat, it’s now.
