Adobe Experience Manager vs Microsoft Office SharePoint Server comparison

"The most valuable features of Adobe Experience Manager include its capability to manage content and create reusable fragments."

"If you want to use content in a mobile application and you want the content in some other application, you can simply expose it from the CMS to different clients or different systems. It's easy. On top of that, the technology underlying AEM is open-source and is very powerful like Apache Sling and JCR."

"Easy to work with the solution."

"The search capability in Adobe Experience Manager is superior, as search capabilities are determined by the metadata, and it also has metadata automation using AI."

"I like the profiling and segmentation."

"It is easy to learn. You don't need to be an advanced Java developer."

"Adobe Experience Manager is pretty stable."

"The integration of customer behavior and website setup is impressive."

"Ability to collaborate with others in one location."

"The implementation and configuring of the resolution are very easy in the online version."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Communication Site."

"What I appreciate most about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is how it centralizes information and collaboration in one place."

"The support from Microsoft is very quick and they are very proactive."

"The solution is pretty easy to use for the most part."

"Some of the best features with Microsoft Office SharePoint Server are that it is easy to use, security is easy, and it's all integrated into the university's security systems."

"The feature that I value the most about Microsoft Office SharePoint Server is the ability to have multiple persons in a file at the same time, which was not possible when we started using computers."

"Bug troubleshooting is challenging and requires developer expertise."

"Programming model could be improved, it's a monolithic solution."

"Adobe's technical support is so-so."

"Adobe Experience Manager's pricing could be improved."

"I assigned a rating of eight because there are certain limitations we must consider, and there are restrictions in Adobe Experience Manager that we cannot resolve."

"Adobe Experience Manager is not so simple to use, so others should have some experience with similar programs."

"There is a feature missing where if content is created on the UAT environment and needs to be transferred or synced to the production environment, there is no direct way of doing the sync."

"I haven't seen any areas for improvement in Adobe Experience Manager as it's a full-fledged CMS tool, and Adobe is already working on enhancements for the solution. Adobe is working to make Adobe Experience Manager more valuable and easier to use for any user, even non-technical ones, through multiple components and templates. Day by day, Adobe provides the latest update to Adobe Experience Manager, and if my team needs any particular change, it just needs to be reported to the Adobe team. As Adobe Experience Manager has a broad scope and a lot of use cases and features, it's a solution that requires some time and effort from you in terms of learning, especially if you're implementing it for different clients, which could be an area for improvement."

"The solution is like a CRM, so the initial setup is complex. It takes a few days to deploy the solution and the length of time depends on how large the company's topology is and what the client's demands are."

"The product is behind in development and lacks some features."

"The areas around security, such as protection, need to be included."

"The solution needs to be more collaborative. I believe they are just coming up with the themes for this right now."

"Workflows could be simplified."

"This solution is not very stable. It is useful to arrange data but it's not the best for big data. Sometimes we have issues with our reports as a result."

"The document management features of Microsoft Office SharePoint Server are not very good compared to OneDrive."

"The ability to preview files in different formats should be expanded to include formats such as embedded postscript (EPS), AutoCAD, and Adobe Acrobat PDF."

"Users have to pay a yearly licensing fee to use the solution, which is highly-priced."

"It's a costly solution. I would rate the price at two out of five on a scale from one to five, where one is the most expensive and five is the most competitive."

"There's a free trial for one month for Adobe Experience Manager, which you can use for learning purposes, then, after the trial period, you'll need to purchase the license. Adobe offers a few plans for Adobe Experience Manager, but I'm unaware of how much my company is paying."

"It's really costly."

"One of the reasons why we don't recommend the cloud version of SharePoint is the cost. With the on premise version, you pay for the license once. For the cloud version, there is a recurring fee. It is very expensive. They expect everyone to pay $20 or $30 per user per month."

"There are some aggressive discounts offered by Microsoft for organizations that are not for profit, which we are, and it makes it quite attractive to consider."

"Pricing plans may be flexible depending on volume usage and your corporate relationship with Microsoft."

"It can be expensive for on-premises deployments, especially when you have to support SQL Server as your backend database. That's where the cost comes into play. SQL Server has its own licensing, which Microsoft keeps on changing. Therefore, it can become costly. In the earlier versions of SharePoint, version 2007 or 2010, they had an express version where the SQL Server licensing was free. It wasn't like a full-blown SharePoint. It was only a slimmed-down version. It used to be whatever your hardware costs. You would install the free software and work with it, but you were very limited in what you could do in SharePoint. If you wanted the SharePoint Enterprise Server with all the bells and whistles, then you had to pay more to get the SQL Server license based on the number of users or servers. The subscription model is different for cloud deployments. Licensing is per user and per month. The cost also depends on the storage required. If you have a lot of sites or documents, then you need to expand it based on your needs."