Simple, it is slow as hell, provides the illusion of a repository, yet lacking features like synchronize, or checking in multiple files at once. On top of that it's acive-x fragfest which makes it only run on IExploder.
Slow? Try running it on real hardware. It's not slow for us.
We also have several employees using Firefox with SharePoint with very few problems. There are almost no activex components used. It's almost entirely html + jscript.
I recommend you talk about things you know -- SharePoint is obviously not one of them.
As evidenced by my lack of evidence, I blogged this in a fit of frustration. I need to use Sharepoint primarily to schedule or to follow schedules, and as a file system.
The bottom line for me right now with just a beginner's experience of SP is that the developers could learn a thing or two from systems like Gmail. With all the widgets and whatnots for web interfaces these days, why is the interface to Sharepoint so damned non-functional?
Microsoft owns the file explorer and the Sharepoint "explorer" I guess it should be called. Why is one the Sharepoint explorer not even remotely as functional as the file explorer?
Probably because SharePoint explorer is a web based interface and Explorer is a desktop application (that can also host web pages)?
Did you know that SharePoint supports WebDAV so you can access document libraries with a network path like this \\MySharePointServer\MySite\MyDocumentLibrary?
Simple, it is slow as hell, provides the illusion of a repository, yet lacking features like synchronize, or checking in multiple files at once. On top of that it's acive-x fragfest which makes it only run on IExploder.
ReplyDeleteSlow? Try running it on real hardware. It's not slow for us.
ReplyDeleteWe also have several employees using Firefox with SharePoint with very few problems. There are almost no activex components used. It's almost entirely html + jscript.
I recommend you talk about things you know -- SharePoint is obviously not one of them.
Speed is not the issue.
ReplyDeleteWhat is, then? ... those of us who don't have opportunity to use it but had guessed that it might suck want to know.
ReplyDeleteThe average slashdot post has less trollness than this blog post.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I have to second the other anonymous guy. It's your post, why not say why Sharepoint is the suckiest thing on the planet?
ReplyDeleteAs evidenced by my lack of evidence, I blogged this in a fit of frustration. I need to use Sharepoint primarily to schedule or to follow schedules, and as a file system.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom line for me right now with just a beginner's experience of SP is that the developers could learn a thing or two from systems like Gmail. With all the widgets and whatnots for web interfaces these days, why is the interface to Sharepoint so damned non-functional?
Microsoft owns the file explorer and the Sharepoint "explorer" I guess it should be called. Why is one the Sharepoint explorer not even remotely as functional as the file explorer?
Probably because SharePoint explorer is a web based interface and Explorer is a desktop application (that can also host web pages)?
ReplyDeleteDid you know that SharePoint supports WebDAV so you can access document libraries with a network path like this
\\MySharePointServer\MySite\MyDocumentLibrary?
You can also map network drives.
Also, how would the developers have learned something from a product that wasn't released until long after theirs?
ReplyDeletePlease no more unimaginative defenses of Sharepoint on this blog.
ReplyDeleteThanks. I'm done here.
But thanks for the WebDAV tip. I'll look into that.
ReplyDeleteUnimaginitive defenses for an incredibly uninformed attack?
ReplyDeleteAgreed. This was a spur of the moment rant, not an argument.
ReplyDelete