...that price isn’t the only reason SharePoint isn’t getting love from the web 2.0 crowd. It may be very powerful, but it’s also complicated. “Trying to move a portal server is like moving a battleship,” he says.
Moreover, he says, Microsoft’s products are built on the old intranet model that doesn’t necessarily encourage lot of collaboration. They’re designed for the old corporate world of command-and-control, enabling layers of permissions that can stifle spontaneity. With wikis and blogs, it’s all much more accessible.”
Although the entire artical deals with the microsoft vs google, and the microsoft office 2007 release, and sharepoint 2007 bdc as a killer, this guy seems to be talking about sharepoint 2003!
It's either that or he doesnt know what he is saying. SharePoint 2007 encourages collaboration so much out of the box, that most of my clients ask me to restrict the collaboration features, because they are afraid the users will spend time "collaborating" instead of "working".
Mr. Velez needs to understand that while sharepoint is designed to allow top notch collaboration, most of the corporate world is not prepared to use it. They install sharepoint, and then spend a lot of money to customize it so that collaboration is trimmed to a minimum.
It's not SharePoint that is "designed for the old corporate world" - its the corporate world that is still old.
It's a pity sharepoint keeps getting bad reputation because people who havent really been using it, or who are not sharepoint professionals have been covering it in the media. I saw a gartner document about half a year ago that totaly discarded what sharepoint 2007 could do, and reviewed the brand name sharepoint as if 2003 was all there was. I admit that 2007 needs a lot of work, and 2003 wasn't perfect, and I would be the first to shout that the 2001 version was a disaster, but saying that sharepoint is built on the old intranet model? what is that???