The Brief

[Great Britten]

To write a document management system full of nebulous concepts and terminology that's littered with undecipherable GUIDS that take a lifetime to cross reference in order to work out what you're actually looking at all backed up with a scant library of amibiguous documentation.

Was that the brief for Sharepoint?

And don't even get me started on Power Apps and Flows.

(Current role is to migrate MS Power Apps/Flows -> React but keep the Sharepoint bits )

[ladymuck]

SharePoint is dire. Has been for a long time and all the plasters they keep sticking on it don't help.

Am discovering that certain features are restricted if you use SharePoint that's a Teams site vs SharePoint that's a Site Collection, and then you get different features depending on what "type" of Site Collection you make. Then there's the different syntax used in different places

[_V_]

To write a <insert every tulip bit of software I seem to find at client companies> system full of nebulous concepts and terminology that's littered with undecipherable GUIDS that take a lifetime to cross reference in order to work out what you're actually looking at all backed up with a scant library of amibiguous documentation.

[_V_]

Software development at big companies, has more in common with those guys and girls that deal with tulip covered fatburgs in sewers, than computer science or engineering....

[vetran]

Sharepoint was Microsoft's response to Domino web server sharing databases. That and a few other DMSs.

It won because technically it was far superior. Having to restart the webserver for every change even in 2003 was ridiculous.

The back end is supposed to be secret and you use APIs. But if you look hard people do explain the secrets.

The back end has been similar since 2003 when I first met it. I managed to understand it when I needed to do things the APIs didn't do.

It is now a complete development environment for portals and collaboration.

I am a fan and have built a number of solutions based on it. It is one of the best ad hoc ways of getting low volume manually added data into SQL server because SP takes care of the interface and security easily.

[ladymuck]

Sharepoint was Microsoft's response to Domino web server sharing databases. That and a few other DMSs.

It won because technically it was far superior. Having to restart the webserver for every change even in 2003 was ridiculous.

The back end is supposed to be secret and you use APIs. But if you look hard people do explain the secrets.

The back end has been similar since 2003 when I first met it. I managed to understand it when I needed to do things the APIs didn't do.

It is now a complete development environment for portals and collaboration.

I am a fan and have built a number of solutions based on it. It is one of the best ad hoc ways of getting low volume manually added data into SQL server because SP takes care of the interface and security easily.

Maybe back end it makes sense but the user side is a challenge and full of really annoying inconsistencies. Definitely developed by different teams with different coding standards.

[Great Britten]

Maybe back end it makes sense but the user side is a challenge and full of really annoying inconsistencies. Definitely developed by different teams with different coding standards.

Yes, my post was from a front office perspective

[eek]

Maybe back end it makes sense but the user side is a challenge and full of really annoying inconsistencies. Definitely developed by different teams with different coding standards.

It's Sharepoint - a bodge of multiple things combined to destroy Lotus Notes...

If you think the front ends are a mess, the backend is way worse.

[AtW]

Inntresting…

[vetran]

It's Sharepoint - a bodge of multiple things combined to destroy Lotus Notes...

If you think the front ends are a mess, the backend is way worse.

Yet for some reason every Fortune 500 has it somewhere important.