This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I sure hope Microsoft sends the Wiki foundation a tenth of the income they'll earn from this product placement. Look at the cite for "It is the dominant software for creating organizational intranets with a recent survey indicating that around 50% of all intranets are developed using SharePoint.[5]" and you'll see that the "recent survey" is actually a push-poll from a 300 member linkedin.com subgroup, equivalent to a rigged survey of hot dog vendors for opinions on quantum electrodynamics. The poll clearly does not represent anything close to reality (half the world is using niche player sharepoint, but only one or two companies are using plone, drupal, joomla, or any of the other widely deployed high performance CMSes that actually dominate the market? Come on!) That cite should be struck and the spurious claim of market dominance deleted.
This is probably actually true for intranets. Plone, drupal, joomla are all great for internet sites (though arguably sitecore dominates all of them), but they're great for view only sites, where a small number of people write and a large number read, but bad for collaborative style intranets more common in the modern organisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.108.253.134 ( talk) 03:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
God love articles like this. It would be so improved by the addition of some some specific examples of what the luckless "non-technical user" might actually do with it in the course of their daily business. Nasier Alcofribas ( talk) 19:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
On the theory that specific comments are often more helpful and more actionable than generalizations, I thought that a promising starting point would be to flesh out the "Wheel" metaphor. It is kind of helpful, but raises more questions than it answers. So in that spirit, I will ask some questions which, for the life of me, I can't figure out, with the hope that someone more knowledgeable than I might be able to answer them.
1. Sites: "A site is a contextual work environment." What is a "contextual work environment"? For that matter, what do you mean when you say "work environment?" I assume you are not referring to a coal mine, lecture hall or aircraft (or maybe you are?). Are you referring to a window that pops up on a computer screen? Or a subdirectory of a filesystem? Or an application that simulates a coal mine, lecture hall or aircraft? Or a programming library that contains abstractions of tasks common to a specific work environment? Or a rocketship? From the name "site," I might guess that you are referring to an html file or similar construct that is rendered on a browser and looks and acts like a website. But the term "contextual work environment" does not convey any particular image to me. Please describe the "thing" that you call a "contextual work environment," in terms that are (as Einstein suggested) "as simple as possible, but not simpler."
2. Communities: "A community is a place for group communication." Again, I assume you are not referring to a Kiwanis hall, but I have no idea what you are referring to. Is a "community" similar to a web-based forum or bulletin board? or is it more like a shared directory on your H-drive? Or an RSS feed? Or an instant messaging app? Or something like Facebook? It's hard to tell from the phrase "a place for group communication."
3. Content: "SharePoint provides document management and storage for work items." Now THIS is pretty clear.
4. Search: "Look for relevant communities, content, people, or sites: search is based on keywords, refinement, and content analysis." Presumably this is not the same as Google or Bing (or is it?). Are you saying it can provide the functionality to search "Sites," "Communities" and "Content"? If so, say so.
5. Insights: "Information from any part of the organization can be surfaced inside useful contexts, providing information that can improve effectiveness." What does it mean to "surface information"? Are you talking about a relational database here? Or the ability to include pointers or URLs or mirrors or shortcuts in your "sites", "Communities" and "Content"? Or something totally different? Who makes the information surface? Does a programmer in your IT department set up a surfacing algorithm that surfaces the appropriate information to the appropriate users? Or does SharePoint itself have tools that allow ordinary users to surface information? How is this different than "Search"?
Composites: SharePoint enables no-code integration of data, documents and processes to provide composite applications ("mash-ups" based on internal data). This is pretty clear too.
Hope that helps! (It would sure help me if someone could answer those questions. Because the web is literally saturated with mumbo jumbo about sharepoint and none of it actually says what it does, or - more importantly - why it suddenly appeared on my computer and what it's doing there!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpkaplan ( talk • contribs) 15:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I do Agree that the wheel paragraph is not clear. Also, The SharePoint 'Client Object Model' (available for JavaScript, Silverlight, and .NET), and REST/SOAP APIs can be referenced from within a custom page, feature, or in SharePoint 2013 from a SharePoint-hosted or Provider-hosted app is very unclear for me to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.25.188 ( talk) 13:35, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
I thought SharePoint used ActiveX controls but there is no mention of that. Or is it all ASP.NET 2? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.158.48.219 ( talk) 13:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
-- 114.31.253.34 ( talk) 12:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
SharePoint on mobile devices is a rising topic that might be included in a new section. Microsoft's moves in this direction include the addition of the /m support in the URL for mobile browsers, the inclusion of Mobile SharePoint Workspace in Office Mobile 2010, and the announcement that SharePoint sync will be a central feature of Windows Phone Series 7. There are also at least three third party companies with different technology approaches to extending SharePoint to the mobile world: Vaultus, H3/Mobile Entree, and Formotus. It might be better if someone else did the writing since I'm in the space, but I can write it neutral if no one else wants to volunteer. WhatMeWork ( talk) 16:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I took the liberty of writing the Mobile section as best as I could, should I edit the page? and Add it myself? or send it to you and you'll add it? YifatAmichay ( talk) 09:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea who this non-existence distinction between SharePoint Server products and some kind of called SharePoint took hold among some people on the site, but the concept is never used by Microsoft in talking about the product.
In the Client Software section of the article, the link to SharePoint browser support planning guidelines returns a file not found error on the Microsoft site.
The best replacement article I could find was Plan browser support (SharePoint Server 2010). Could someone that knows more about the product check this is the right page to reference? Thanks. -- TenguTech( Talk) 23:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
This article was written by me, a developer, a designer, and a technical consultant. As such it's not the best article for an end-user perspective on SharePoint. Would appreciate someone with expertise adding that section. -- Alirobe ( talk) 16:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
The first sentence of the article is practically free of information. "Microsoft SharePoint is a popular Sharepoint Solution developed by Microsoft..." This statement is tautological and useless to anybody who doesn't already know what Sharepoint is. Request that somebody who understands this product write a concise summary which doesn't rely on knowing what the product does. Leopd ( talk) 20:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Old conversations have been moved to the Pre-2010 Archive -- Alirobe ( talk) 09:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I have proposed merging the following pages with this page:
Of particular note should be citations. This article contains very few citations, although in my view the structure of the content is more comprehensive. We need to use as many citations as possible from all documents merged into this document. -- Alirobe ( talk) 09:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Is that a different version than Foundation, Standard and Enterprise? or is it another thing? bcartolo ( talk) 05:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
"The SharePoint platform fundamentally enables users to provision 'sites'..."
What does "provision" mean as a verb here? Is this well known? (I've never heard it, but...)
"SharePoint can integrate with SQL Server Reporting Services to surface business intelligence."
Another noun-as-verb! What does "surface" mean in this context? Is there a better way to say this?
"These customizations may be surfaced as..."
-- KSnortum ( talk) 01:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
How about a section discussing how add-ons can be installed to extend the out-of-the-box functionality? It could be added as a sub-section of the Configuration and Customization section. Also references to lists of add-ons would be useful. Kjhosein ( talk) 14:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
The opening two paragraphs feel like they use unnecessarily positive language when describing Sharepoint: "recent versions have significantly broader capabilities," and "SharePoint comprises a multipurpose set of web technologies which are useful for many organizations,".
Would these be better with a more objective cast? Or, perhaps just delete those two sentences altogether: "By default, SharePoint has a Microsoft Office-like interface, and it is closely integrated with the Office suite. The web tools are designed to be usable by non-technical users." is a nicely clear intro to second para without it. Zach Beauvais ( talk) 19:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone know what this product actually is? This reads like a Microsoft marketing Web site and there is no description of what this software is used for.
The SharePoint Wheel? Seriously? Why is that in here?
128.174.127.111 ( talk) 14:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
In Pages subsection of Core platform functionality section, the second sentence begins "Unlike prior versions of SharePoint, the default page type is..." Presumably that intends to reference the default page type in the current version. That should be specified, including the version, though I'm not willing to add it given the ambiguity and my limited understanding of SharePoint. Don Hammond ( talk) 11:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Sharepoint is one of the most criticized products , yet there's nothing in here at all! There's enough referenced material out there for a separate section. How would this go over if it was added? BashBrannigan ( talk) 12:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
There are a bunch of third party SharePoint Plugins that provide additional functionality, the section should either be expanded or broken off into a separate page? Thoughts? Kharnagy ( talk) 16:23, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
One of these vendors is Nintex, which I dont see anywhere on the page: https://www.nintex.com/workflow-automation/sharepoint/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.171.149 ( talk) 23:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
"The SharePoint CVE-2019-0604 vulnerability has been one of the most targeted security flaws" FBI: Nation-state actors have breached two US municipalities, ZDNet. - A876 ( talk) 22:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
For this quote: "The technical stack is yeoman, node.js, webstack, gulp, npm", it sounds like they meant webpack, not "webstack". Everything here is involved in frontend building, and I've never heard of webstack, and webpack is a frontend bundler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forest51690 ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I sure hope Microsoft sends the Wiki foundation a tenth of the income they'll earn from this product placement. Look at the cite for "It is the dominant software for creating organizational intranets with a recent survey indicating that around 50% of all intranets are developed using SharePoint.[5]" and you'll see that the "recent survey" is actually a push-poll from a 300 member linkedin.com subgroup, equivalent to a rigged survey of hot dog vendors for opinions on quantum electrodynamics. The poll clearly does not represent anything close to reality (half the world is using niche player sharepoint, but only one or two companies are using plone, drupal, joomla, or any of the other widely deployed high performance CMSes that actually dominate the market? Come on!) That cite should be struck and the spurious claim of market dominance deleted.
This is probably actually true for intranets. Plone, drupal, joomla are all great for internet sites (though arguably sitecore dominates all of them), but they're great for view only sites, where a small number of people write and a large number read, but bad for collaborative style intranets more common in the modern organisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.108.253.134 ( talk) 03:41, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
God love articles like this. It would be so improved by the addition of some some specific examples of what the luckless "non-technical user" might actually do with it in the course of their daily business. Nasier Alcofribas ( talk) 19:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
On the theory that specific comments are often more helpful and more actionable than generalizations, I thought that a promising starting point would be to flesh out the "Wheel" metaphor. It is kind of helpful, but raises more questions than it answers. So in that spirit, I will ask some questions which, for the life of me, I can't figure out, with the hope that someone more knowledgeable than I might be able to answer them.
1. Sites: "A site is a contextual work environment." What is a "contextual work environment"? For that matter, what do you mean when you say "work environment?" I assume you are not referring to a coal mine, lecture hall or aircraft (or maybe you are?). Are you referring to a window that pops up on a computer screen? Or a subdirectory of a filesystem? Or an application that simulates a coal mine, lecture hall or aircraft? Or a programming library that contains abstractions of tasks common to a specific work environment? Or a rocketship? From the name "site," I might guess that you are referring to an html file or similar construct that is rendered on a browser and looks and acts like a website. But the term "contextual work environment" does not convey any particular image to me. Please describe the "thing" that you call a "contextual work environment," in terms that are (as Einstein suggested) "as simple as possible, but not simpler."
2. Communities: "A community is a place for group communication." Again, I assume you are not referring to a Kiwanis hall, but I have no idea what you are referring to. Is a "community" similar to a web-based forum or bulletin board? or is it more like a shared directory on your H-drive? Or an RSS feed? Or an instant messaging app? Or something like Facebook? It's hard to tell from the phrase "a place for group communication."
3. Content: "SharePoint provides document management and storage for work items." Now THIS is pretty clear.
4. Search: "Look for relevant communities, content, people, or sites: search is based on keywords, refinement, and content analysis." Presumably this is not the same as Google or Bing (or is it?). Are you saying it can provide the functionality to search "Sites," "Communities" and "Content"? If so, say so.
5. Insights: "Information from any part of the organization can be surfaced inside useful contexts, providing information that can improve effectiveness." What does it mean to "surface information"? Are you talking about a relational database here? Or the ability to include pointers or URLs or mirrors or shortcuts in your "sites", "Communities" and "Content"? Or something totally different? Who makes the information surface? Does a programmer in your IT department set up a surfacing algorithm that surfaces the appropriate information to the appropriate users? Or does SharePoint itself have tools that allow ordinary users to surface information? How is this different than "Search"?
Composites: SharePoint enables no-code integration of data, documents and processes to provide composite applications ("mash-ups" based on internal data). This is pretty clear too.
Hope that helps! (It would sure help me if someone could answer those questions. Because the web is literally saturated with mumbo jumbo about sharepoint and none of it actually says what it does, or - more importantly - why it suddenly appeared on my computer and what it's doing there!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpkaplan ( talk • contribs) 15:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I do Agree that the wheel paragraph is not clear. Also, The SharePoint 'Client Object Model' (available for JavaScript, Silverlight, and .NET), and REST/SOAP APIs can be referenced from within a custom page, feature, or in SharePoint 2013 from a SharePoint-hosted or Provider-hosted app is very unclear for me to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.25.188 ( talk) 13:35, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
I thought SharePoint used ActiveX controls but there is no mention of that. Or is it all ASP.NET 2? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.158.48.219 ( talk) 13:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
-- 114.31.253.34 ( talk) 12:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
SharePoint on mobile devices is a rising topic that might be included in a new section. Microsoft's moves in this direction include the addition of the /m support in the URL for mobile browsers, the inclusion of Mobile SharePoint Workspace in Office Mobile 2010, and the announcement that SharePoint sync will be a central feature of Windows Phone Series 7. There are also at least three third party companies with different technology approaches to extending SharePoint to the mobile world: Vaultus, H3/Mobile Entree, and Formotus. It might be better if someone else did the writing since I'm in the space, but I can write it neutral if no one else wants to volunteer. WhatMeWork ( talk) 16:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I took the liberty of writing the Mobile section as best as I could, should I edit the page? and Add it myself? or send it to you and you'll add it? YifatAmichay ( talk) 09:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I have no idea who this non-existence distinction between SharePoint Server products and some kind of called SharePoint took hold among some people on the site, but the concept is never used by Microsoft in talking about the product.
In the Client Software section of the article, the link to SharePoint browser support planning guidelines returns a file not found error on the Microsoft site.
The best replacement article I could find was Plan browser support (SharePoint Server 2010). Could someone that knows more about the product check this is the right page to reference? Thanks. -- TenguTech( Talk) 23:55, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
This article was written by me, a developer, a designer, and a technical consultant. As such it's not the best article for an end-user perspective on SharePoint. Would appreciate someone with expertise adding that section. -- Alirobe ( talk) 16:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
The first sentence of the article is practically free of information. "Microsoft SharePoint is a popular Sharepoint Solution developed by Microsoft..." This statement is tautological and useless to anybody who doesn't already know what Sharepoint is. Request that somebody who understands this product write a concise summary which doesn't rely on knowing what the product does. Leopd ( talk) 20:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Old conversations have been moved to the Pre-2010 Archive -- Alirobe ( talk) 09:24, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I have proposed merging the following pages with this page:
Of particular note should be citations. This article contains very few citations, although in my view the structure of the content is more comprehensive. We need to use as many citations as possible from all documents merged into this document. -- Alirobe ( talk) 09:22, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Is that a different version than Foundation, Standard and Enterprise? or is it another thing? bcartolo ( talk) 05:09, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
"The SharePoint platform fundamentally enables users to provision 'sites'..."
What does "provision" mean as a verb here? Is this well known? (I've never heard it, but...)
"SharePoint can integrate with SQL Server Reporting Services to surface business intelligence."
Another noun-as-verb! What does "surface" mean in this context? Is there a better way to say this?
"These customizations may be surfaced as..."
-- KSnortum ( talk) 01:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
How about a section discussing how add-ons can be installed to extend the out-of-the-box functionality? It could be added as a sub-section of the Configuration and Customization section. Also references to lists of add-ons would be useful. Kjhosein ( talk) 14:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
The opening two paragraphs feel like they use unnecessarily positive language when describing Sharepoint: "recent versions have significantly broader capabilities," and "SharePoint comprises a multipurpose set of web technologies which are useful for many organizations,".
Would these be better with a more objective cast? Or, perhaps just delete those two sentences altogether: "By default, SharePoint has a Microsoft Office-like interface, and it is closely integrated with the Office suite. The web tools are designed to be usable by non-technical users." is a nicely clear intro to second para without it. Zach Beauvais ( talk) 19:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Does anyone know what this product actually is? This reads like a Microsoft marketing Web site and there is no description of what this software is used for.
The SharePoint Wheel? Seriously? Why is that in here?
128.174.127.111 ( talk) 14:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
In Pages subsection of Core platform functionality section, the second sentence begins "Unlike prior versions of SharePoint, the default page type is..." Presumably that intends to reference the default page type in the current version. That should be specified, including the version, though I'm not willing to add it given the ambiguity and my limited understanding of SharePoint. Don Hammond ( talk) 11:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Sharepoint is one of the most criticized products , yet there's nothing in here at all! There's enough referenced material out there for a separate section. How would this go over if it was added? BashBrannigan ( talk) 12:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
There are a bunch of third party SharePoint Plugins that provide additional functionality, the section should either be expanded or broken off into a separate page? Thoughts? Kharnagy ( talk) 16:23, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
One of these vendors is Nintex, which I dont see anywhere on the page: https://www.nintex.com/workflow-automation/sharepoint/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.171.149 ( talk) 23:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
"The SharePoint CVE-2019-0604 vulnerability has been one of the most targeted security flaws" FBI: Nation-state actors have breached two US municipalities, ZDNet. - A876 ( talk) 22:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
For this quote: "The technical stack is yeoman, node.js, webstack, gulp, npm", it sounds like they meant webpack, not "webstack". Everything here is involved in frontend building, and I've never heard of webstack, and webpack is a frontend bundler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forest51690 ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 23 April 2020 (UTC)