All posts in the topic Sharepoint vs Oracle Universal Content Management
Summary
- There are 6 posts — by 5 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Richard Burdes at Jun 14 10:41 NZST
Hi Folks,
We are at a point where it's looking like we will adopt either Share Point or
Oracle Universal Content Management to get our systems all talking to each
other and delivered through our intranet. So files, work groups, news,
directories all linked up.
Whilst we have a good understanding of user experiences with Share Point we do
not have much on Oracle.
Does anyone have any user experiences on this solution?
Best regards
Rich B
Hi Richard - I was involved in making this exact choice for an employer about
10 years ago. At that time it was between Microsoft CMS 2001 and an Oracle
product (can't remember what it was called back then). We went with CMS 2001
BECAUSE when we got the vendors of each system in we asked them to give us
practical demonstrations of using their tool to do simple configurations. What
we found was that with Oracle there was very little the vendors were able to
show us - most of the time the things we wanted to do required going back to
their dev team for advice. Even some of the most simple questions we had such
as 'can this item be moved to another area?' required them to go into a small
huddle and come to a decision between themselves before involving us in the
answer :)
Of course - that was 10 years ago - and perhaps the vendors just didn't know
what they were doing but... my point is - I would use the same method again if
I was choosing between two options like that. It's a great way to get a feel
for what the basic user experience is like and to see what potential vendors
know about the product they are offering you.
From memory and according to wikipedia Oracle Universal Content Management is the product formerly known as Stellent. From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Fusion_Middleware): Oracle Universal Content Management: In November 2006 Oracle Corporation acquired Stellent, a software-development company (based in Eden Prairie, Minnesota) which provided content management systems. Stellent's primary product, "Universal Content Management" (UCM), the foundation of most of its other content-management products, became Oracle Universal Content Management as a part of the Oracle Fusion Middleware stack.[10] The term "Stellent" continues in use[by whom?] for this suite of applications. (Before 2001 Stellent had used the name "Intranet Solutions" and called its product first "IntraDoc!", then briefly "Xpedia". As of 2010 Oracle Corporation continues to occupy the former Stellent location at 7500 Flying Cloud Dr. in Eden Prairie.) Hope that helps.
Hi Richard, If in fact you are wanting to use Sharepoint for Web Content Management, this article re. license costs may be of interest: http://www.jboye.com/blogpost/untangling-sharepoint-pricing-licensing-for-wcm/ I still wonder why organisations would want to pay such large upfront licensing costs to MS when you can use equally adequate opensource solutions. I appreciate, though, that Airways did come along to World Plone Day Wellington to check out one such example of an Enterprise CMS, which is great. Regards, Tim [1] http://plone.org/events/wpd/2010/wellington-new-zealand/ On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 21:06 +1200, Steph Beath wrote: > Hi Richard - I was involved in making this exact choice for an employer about 10 years ago. At that time it was between Microsoft CMS 2001 and an Oracle product (can't remember what it was called back then). We went with CMS 2001 BECAUSE when we got the vendors of each system in we asked them to give us practical demonstrations of using their tool to do simple configurations. What we found was that with Oracle there was very little the vendors were able to show us - most of the time the things we wanted to do required going back to their dev team for advice. Even some of the most simple questions we had such as 'can this item be moved to another area?' required them to go into a small huddle and come to a decision between themselves before involving us in the answer :) > > Of course - that was 10 years ago - and perhaps the vendors just didn't know what they were doing but... my point is - I would use the same method again if I was choosing between two options like that. It's a great way to get a feel for what the basic user experience is like and to see what potential vendors know about the product they are offering you.
Hi Richard,
Like others, I'd strongly encourage the development of a clear set of
business requirements for the products, including the required level of
usability for decentralised authors. Based on the products you're
looking at, I'm guessing this would encompass collaboration in addition
to just content publishing.
Then you can do a semi-formal (internal) evaluation of the products,
to get a sense of fit, and total cost of ownership.
Both products have huge strenths, and equally huge weaknesses, so
there isn't a "right" answer for this, only the right answer for your
specific circumstances.
Cheers,
James
> We are at a point where it's looking like we will adopt either Share Point or
Oracle Universal Content Management to get our systems all talking to each
other and delivered through our intranet. So files, work groups, news,
directories all linked up.
>
> Whilst we have a good understanding of user experiences with Share Point we
do not have much on Oracle.
Thanks Everyone for your comments so far.
We are working on various schemas for what we'd see people in different levels
on the organisation being required to do then trying to compare the products
against these.
I guess what I was looking for from the intranet community was any info from
anyone using the Oracle product to get a non consultant view on how well
supported it is in New Zealand. Currently I'm aware of only a couple
organisations using it, and then in a limited capacity such as just for
document content management or so.
I'll let you all know how we get on, thanks for all the pearls of wisdom so
far!
This site is provided by OnlineGroups.Net, where you can start your own free online groups site, using the open source web-based mailing list manager GroupServer.