An honest look at Sharepoint 2007 and 2010
May 03, 2016

An honest look at Sharepoint 2007 and 2010

Adam Weller | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with MS SharePoint

Sharepoint is being used by our small interactive marketing department to support upwards of 60 web sites for different business units in the insurance industry. We started with Sharepoint 2007 and have recently been migrating sites over to the 2010 platform. Sharepoint gives our interactive team an easily scalable tool for adding new templates, expanding or redesigning current sites, managing changes in a test environment, and tracking all of our changes and progress across our multi-user account.
  • Easily build out template pages using WSYWIG editors instead of HTML programming, though both are allowed
  • It has a strong version tracking infrastructure which allows for easily reverting back to previously checked-in or past-published pages, which can help save a lot of time and energy if something incorrect or harmful is accidentally pushed live.
  • The "View All Content" interface is easy to manage and sort, giving the Site Admin the right tools to easily update Content or Navigation Mapping, or change the properties of any number of pages, or upload or overwrite resources such as images and PDFs, etc.
  • Straightforward User Control - it's simple to add users to different access groups, giving some stakeholders "read only" access or full site editing controls, allow for easy transfer of editing duties.
  • Forms, forms, forms. We have been forced to use a third party system for data collection, as the form scripts in both 2007 and 2010 versions have been unusable.
  • Browser incompatibility is still a major problem. Get used to using Internet Explorer if you want the most out of Sharepoint, as Chrome and Firefox all present editing snafus, especially when attempting to edit content areas.
  • Fickle navigation errors. Writing and deploying a multi-level navigation menu has caused many headaches. Although Javascript and other languages are largely compatible, it isn't always easy to "plug and play" your working scripts into content areas or navigation panes and expect it to work so smoothly.
  • Site optimization. Sharepoint tends to add a whole mess of unnecessary code with each press of a WYSIWYG button, or even if you simply check in after hand-writing a large chunk of content code. Extraneous code is dropped into content areas whether you want it there or not, which greatly reduces how optimal the page is read by search engine spiders, so if optimization and site validation is important to your site, you might want to use a different tool than Sharepoint.
  • Increased employee efficiency via shared access and easily deployed pages
  • Safer deployment of information via check-ins and overnight page pushes
MS Sharepoint was integrated in our marketing department before I arrived. Although we've run into some issues with some of its features, such as forms, its poor native Search application, and some other logistical headaches, we've been pretty happy overall with the way we've been able to use the tool to manage several dozen sites at once, with only a team of five marketers.
I think Sharepoint is well-suited for organizations that need to manage multiple web sites with one tool that takes advantages of templated site design, but you are limited in its design strategies and "box-building" layouts. The content management system works for most applications, but some scripts such as forms as well as installing a [tap to call] on top of every phone number has hardly ever worked out. There's a lot to like, but if your organization only needs to concentrate on a client-facing site or two, then I'd recommend using a different tool entirely.

SharePoint Feature Ratings