Comments on: Two Types of SharePoint/MOSS Environments

By: migratenotes

migratenotes — Thu, 08 May 2008 11:23:50 +0000

@6) 24 servers for SharePoint vs. 3 Servers for Domino. But it is also much more robust in terms of load balancing and full dev and test environments.

By: David Bell

David Bell — Fri, 02 May 2008 22:44:32 +0000

I’m curious as to the dimensions of your deployment. How many users ? How much infrastructure (think I saw 24 servers mentioned somewhere) ?

Can you provide more details on the architecture and, if possible, how that compares to your Notes/Domino environment ?

By: V.

V. — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:23:54 +0000

I have been on several Notes to Sharepoint pojects as a consultant. None of them have been successfull for the client (yet) and none have brought any cost savings (unlikely to ever happen).

What everybody seems to underestimate is also the fundamental shift in network architectire that such a migration requires. If you are going from a distributed Domino model to a centralized Sharepoint model then massive Network upgrades can result from that (depending on company and infrastructure). These are usually costs that don’t get captured in the original project estimate.

Also, another reason why allot of these projects happen is that MS actually foots part of the bill; they know when to spend a buck to make 2 bucks back later …

By: NeilT

NeilT — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:08:47 +0000

Lesson learned.

Ensure your esteemed 3rd party has both the knowledge and experience to deliver the promised $zillion system “As Described”.

Take References, go and visit reference sites. Actually see it working and see how complex the final solutions are to deliver and maintain.

This is not just common to Microsoft software, just IMO “More Common”.

In the long run I doubt that you’ll be able to walk away from the decision and investment. However you won’t be able to walk away from Domino either any time soon …

Better start planning that sale now. The better planning you have the better it will sound when it has to be delivered….

By: Michael de Haas

Michael de Haas — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:22:45 +0000

Notes apps started KISS with many companies in the old days. The demand grew and the number of notes DBs grew biting all of these companies years later – some of whom created such a mess that they happily threw Notes out, but of course, would never admit to screwing up, especially since it was over many budget cycles. This will happen to Sharepoint – but the wasteland will be larger and any attempt to fix (there will be a proliferation of 3rd party tools) will cost more in time and material. But that is another budget cycle … excellent business model for MS and partners – so stick with this mess – you are going to make a fortune from other peoples stupidity for a year or 2 of hair loss – a bargain, so milk it while it lasts.

By: AutoSponge

AutoSponge — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 14:21:12 +0000

I used method 1. But I have baked-in some serious flaws related to information architecture, so now I’m going to go back to the drawing board and use method 2 to REBUILD everything.

My method 2 build, while annoying, will certainly be much better having already done my experiments with method 1. But nothing says you can’t do both from the start. Have two site collections: one uses loose permissions and ad-hoc architecture while the other remains closely guarded and rigid.

Companies just starting with MOSS should consider two projects running in tandem with different SLAs and requirements instead of trying to force all requirements into one site collection with the most aggressive SLAs.

By: Peter Ward

Peter Ward — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:52:02 +0000

I think what is going on with this, that that folks aren’t 100 % sure what the technology can do for them and end user training is key.