SharePoint is leading Gartner Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portals

  • [アーティクル]

Gartner recently published a report by Jim Murphy, Gene Phifer, Ray Valdes and Eric Knipp: the 2010 Magic Quadrant for Horizontal Portals.  In the report, Microsoft not only maintains its Leadership ranking but moves into the #1 position on the report – highest on both the Ability to Execute and Completeness of Vision axes – overtaking IBM.

Five vendors dominated portal selections during the latter part of 2009 and into 2010: Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, SAP and Liferay. Microsoft SharePoint is a consideration in more Gartner portal inquiries — over 70% — than any other vendor.

Source: Gartner (September 2010)

https://blogs.technet.com/b/cbortlik/archive/2010/10/19/congratulations-to-sharepoint-product-team-for-achieving-1-ranking-on-gartner-s-2010-horizontal-portals-magic-quadrant.aspx

Comments

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2003
    A solid movement since 2007 shows a real invetment by Microsoft in SharePoint, no wonder its number one now.

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    Garner needs to add a third  order to the graph 'customer satisfaction', on which from my experience of talking to the near suicidal end users of sharepoint, Microsoft would be very close to the bottom of the pile.

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    This article is from 2010!!! Why is it featured on LinkedIn's homepage as breaking news in 2012?

  • Anonymous
    March 19, 2012
    @OtherKevin and @Kumar:  I've heard the same arguments over and over again...  "If they'd just take the time to plan it right..."  Or "These companies just didn't implement SharePoint properly..."  It's a load of bullocks.  IBM and Oracle's portal products are absolute garbage for the same reason:  They're all in the same category of, "Tools designed for anyone other than end users." You see, that's the big difference between SharePoint and any given wiki:  With SharePoint only the business leaders and IT decision-makers can make it better (usually by spending money on more Microsoft software, hah).  With a wiki the users can make it better. Not only that but the search functions in wikis actually work!  And you call call up any page in your browser without the need to load a gigantic, bloated office suite or a plugin that just does the same in the background.  These pages can even be indexed by external inside-the-company search engines.  They can be linked without requiring a URL that's a mile long.  The links can even be ContextuallyRelevant and MakeSense. Compare that with writing an article in Word then "checking it in" to SharePoint where it will be unsearchable and forgotten about forever.  Never mind the file seemingly innumerable annoyances that SharePoint provides in addition to its basic function which seems to be:  Being useless.  It brings nothing to the table.  It enables users to do what, exactly?  What "value add" does it provide?  I can't even fathom what it is supposed to be doing because every use of it I've ever seen is nothing more than a glorified file share.

  • Anonymous
    March 21, 2012
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    September 30, 2014
    Forrester categorizes Sharepoint in a specific portal category, as it can't be bought as a portal solely.
    I am not a huge SharePoint fan, but I am sure that it is the companies of your failing SharePoint solutions that rather have a failing architecture practice. All MS developments require a strong Enterprise Architecture approach to be successful and long-term durable.