Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations IamaSherpa on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

MOSS/LiveLink Comparison

Status
Not open for further replies.

madhuusa

IS-IT--Management
Oct 5, 2006
93
US
Here is my take on SharePoint 2007 and LiveLink

Of late, I am extensively working on 2007 but LiveLink is the leader in our company.

Please feel free to add your points.

SP 2003 and MOSS 2007:
------------------------
the less said the better about 2003. so i will jump to 2007.

1. MOSS enterprise edition a gimmick. I can as well build a .net interface to SAP/SIEBEL/etc systems and talk with MOSS to storing content from my application. BDC does not give anything new except to have a placeholder in enterprise edition.

2. Same with excel services. It is a good tool, but I can suppose we can do the same thing in .net in very easy fashion.

3. Same with advanced info path forms. I can as well as build a .net app and talk to sharepoint. Why bother to buy enterprise edition at all?

4. So enterprise edition does not give anything new except to make money for our beloved Mr.Softee.

5. Scalability a huge issue. Also even if your data reaches 1TB, you have to put in place a strong dba, a strong administrator and a strong architect just to keep things going. These guys cost easily close to 100 per hour each and they constantly move for better billing rates!!!!

6. If you are looking at 5TB to 20TB (a fairly medium, i wont say big because big means greater than 50TB as LiveLink installations continuously notch up huge installations), then you are seeing a mess of front end's and application servers.

7. If you touch anything then it is a .net work and that means a dedicated sharepoint developer.

8. Storing all content within the db is shocking. Imagine maintaining 2TB database for even basic document management storage!!!! Whoa.. dba where are ya!!!!

9. One good thing is UI in 2007 is good. But most content/doc mgmt system's user interface has dramatically improved in their latest versions. This includes Documentum 5 and 6 and LiveLink 9.2, 9.5 and 9.7

LiveLink:
--------------
1. A massively scalable system with relatively small server footprints.

2. No need to even have an admin to be present once you get the infrastructure and modules in place.

3. Zero dba needed. Zero architect needed after inital work.

4. Very very very very low maintenance baby.

5. Can scale massively to ten's of terrabytes of data with just small footprint of front end web servers. Content stored externally means zero database worries.

6. Neat UI in their latest version a huge advantage

7. No standard/enterprise edition gimmicks

8. Strong support from even basic OpenText support. cheap becomes cheaper.

9. Licenses can be negotiated as low as $100 per user license.

10. Can be easily exposed to extranet's/internet via their servlet option.

11. OScript is a rare skill but with few API's to catchup, a developer can easily be trained on this.

12. Perhaps the most powerful workflow engine out there among cont/doc mgmt systems.

If I were to recommend, I will do LiveLink over anything. I have not worked in Documentum and so cannot comment on it.

Guru's please add your thoughts. I will listen to more who can disagree with me :)

 
Sorry for my ramblings here.

Appnair has correctly made a remark in one of previous posts.

2)SP seems to be designed by web developers whereas both DCTM and OT seems to have been developed by Document Mnagement systems people.

MOSS looks like technical nerds designed the product to be used only well tech nerds in IT department and be supported by geeks in administration and dba on the database side :)

As you work in MOSS, you lose all semblance of content and business processes and get deep technical like content databases, site collections, web applications, templates tweaking, etc - all these for normal day to day activities!!!

They should have named MOSS as Microsoft Tech Only Support Service :)
 
ok. let's listen to Gartner okay?

i have been telling ya guys da all the time. Go LiveLink for da sure da man :)


Though it covers a broad spectrum of capabilities, MOSS 2007 is not yet a full enterprise content management (ECM) system. Organizations requiring advanced content management capabilities and process-centric applications will need to augment their capabilities with partner offerings, or deploy MOSS 2007 alongside an ECM system rather than as a replacement for it.


In many organizations, adoption of SharePoint is driven by misperceptions that it is a low cost product or by organizational politics rather than by a thorough examination of the total cost of ownership and a needs analysis. SharePoint is not necessarily free or low cost and, depending on requirements, may not be the best option.


Through client interactions, Gartner has collected many data points on SharePoint’s challenges regarding its suitability as an ECM platform. These challenges include server replication issues, scalability, significant infrastructure costs, inability to support compound documents, and limited process management capabilities. These limitations have led most client organizations we speak with to implement WSS or MOSS as an adjunct to, but not a replacement for, current ECM platforms.


While the costs of SharePoint products and technologies may seem modest at first, additional costs for storage, database and server licenses, customization and implementation services can increase the total cost of ownership dramatically. Gartner has talked to several customers who are getting bids for extensive implementations in the range of $500,000 to $1 million (or even more), bringing it more in-line with the costs of traditional ECM suites.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top