CIO Magazine - Technical or UI Snag

Posted on 2/15/2008 @ 1:51 PM in #SharePoint by | Feedback | 5561 views

I recently read this article on SharePoint 2007 in the CIO Magazine.

The article is mostly positive about the capabilities of SharePoint 2007.

The author also mentions that "Strategy should be incremental" - I think that applies to any IT project. Then, he has a heading "Where SharePoint falls short". He mentions a few points, that actually I mostly agree with. Out of the box, it doesn't provide you with 100% - it is a platform, not a solution. And out of the box, excel services, and it's ECM capabilities are not stellar, so you need to hook it up with SSRS, Documentum etc.

Though, there is one heading I had a hard time agreeing with, which is "Beware of Microsoft Baggage".

If anything, SharePoint 2007 has a very good story around ripping out the Microsoft Baggage. You can completely replace AD, and Exchange with whatever you want. I have personally delivered MOSS installations that integrated with SiteMinder, and Lotus Notes. The process to do so was quite straightforward.

I don't know for what reason, perhaps legal reasons, Microsoft made a very concious effort to make major components in MOSS replaceable. The end result is a product that has no dependency on Microsoft platform - other than on the server side (i.e. ASP.NET/SQL Server). But as far as the end user is concerned, they could be using a Mac or Linux.

Now, why is this blogpost titled "Journalistic Ethics"? Because I pointed the above as a comment on that article. Unfortunately, 48 hours later, my comment is still not visible, so I have to assume that someone is actively moderating comments.

It's not nice to have a "Leave comment" area, and then have comments not appear, sort of creates the false impression that the articles are validated by public comment and scrutiny, when they are not!


Update: See comment by Esther Schindler below. I have renamed the title of this post to "Technical Snag", because perhaps that is what it was. Or maybe I didn't go through the confirm process. Anyway, whether the comment was on, or on my site, I've made my views about the article public, which was my intent anyway.

Sound off but keep it civil:

Older comments..

On 2/14/2008 1:26:12 PM Becky Isserman said ..
What is really strange is that there is only one comment from January 22nd. That's almost a full month worth of comments that's missing. It's almost as if they decided all the comments were too negative and would not post them at all. Still you are right that is slightly wrong to allow everyone to leave a comment and even to default it to anonymous.

On 2/14/2008 1:27:47 PM Becky Isserman said ..
What is really strange is that there is only one comment from January 22nd. There is a full months worth of comments missing. Also, why even bother defaulting it to Anonymous? Unless maybe the person moderating has no idea what they are doing so they are just not approving any comments.

On 2/14/2008 1:36:34 PM Sahil Malik said ..
Wow I didn't realize that the last comment that says "FYI" was more than a month old.

On 2/15/2008 7:26:17 AM Pranav said ..
I would say repost the comment. I've actually tried posting a comment on your site on numerous occassions with some of them never showing up. I'd be more willing to pin this as 'technical problems' than 'journalistic ethics'. Especially given the fact that the last comment is over a month old.

On 2/15/2008 12:16:02 PM Esther Schindler said ..
I'm the "blog Mom" and online community manager for The editor in chief asked me to take a look at this, to see if your comment had gotten stuck in the spam filter -- which happens more often than you'd think. (For example, posts in the Advice & Opinion section of the site that have five or more URLs are auto-flagged as spam, for kind-of-obvious reasons.)

However, there isn't any unpublished comment on this article. My guess is that you wrote it, clicked on Preview the Post, and assumed that, once you'd previewed it, you were finished. When you actually have to click on Submit before it goes live (or into anti-spam purgatory). I've gotten lost in such processes myself, particularly when making an online credit card payment; it's easy to dust off your hands and think you're done when you need to click on Confirm.

The reason that there aren't additional comments on the article is because nobody posted any. Sorry if that doesn't match your expectations or worldview, but it's the truth. <<smile>>

If you poke around on, you'll see that we do generally leave comments alone, whether positive or negative. We remove comments only when they're abusive (such as gratuitous use of naughty words), or when they make unsubstantiated claims. (For example, someone posting an anonymous comment saying, "he was fired because he had an affair with his secretary" would be removed because a human's reputation is on the line and we're aware of Internet reports living forever even if they aren't accurate; but we'd be likely to investigate to find out if it's' true).

Don't attribute to journalistic ethics what can be explained by spam filters, in any case!

Esther Schindler

senior online editor,

On 2/15/2008 1:44:28 PM Sahil Malik said ..
Pranav, I did repost a different comment - which didn't show up either.

I did have a technical problem where if the user hit "Enter" instead of submit feedback, the comment wouldn't actually post. That since has been fixed. I have moderated probably 0.001% of the comments left, usually something really awful like marketing of chinese herbs etc.

On 2/15/2008 1:47:08 PM Sahil Malik said ..

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am a bit reassured given that you have been proactive about this.

Okay, lets chalk this one up for technical issue, maybe I didn't hit confirm (I don't remember), etc.

Fair enough, I will modify my post to reflect a possible technical issue/snag etc.



On 2/15/2008 1:58:43 PM Sahil Malik said ..
Okay the comment made it through this time around.