Can WordonWiki be compared to MS SharePoint?
March 17th, 2010
In a blog post of Martin Seibert called MS SharePoint as a Wiki: Few Functions, less Compatibility the author gives his view if MS SharePoint could be used as a Wiki.
His answer is simply "No".
Being this Microsoft Word dependent webservice, we looked closely to see if any of his arguments could be applied to WordonWiki. Let's run down the main reasons the author gives to justify his view.
Speed
MS SharePoint's architecture allows for a multi-server setup, forcing libraries and documents to be downloaded from one server to another. As there is no preview function, the document needs to be opened before it is viewable.
Thankfully, WordonWiki operates slightly different. It only requires you to download the page in case you need to edit it.Further optimizations will buffer pages on the user's machine to speed up even further the edit operation.
User Productivity
We were surprised to know MS SharePoint does not have a full-text search feature. This was foreseen in WordonWiki right from day1, requiring us to foresee special full text tables that can be indexed by mySQL text indexes. Not only for the current version of the page, but across revisions as well.
Lack of compatibility
Clearly you need MS Office on your machine if you want to work with MS SharePoint or WordonWiki. However unlike MS SharePoint, WordonWiki works on all major browsers like IE, FF, Safari and Chrome.You wouldn't settle for less. Nor would we.
Hide or Share
By default, MS SharePoint's documents are hidden, you need to flag them as public to make them visible. Indeed the exact opposite of what we expect from a wiki.
Origin of the product
MS SharePoint originally was a 'portal' solution. It has some data centric features added and the recent addition is the wiki feature. I've been at customer workshops where people actually believe that SharePoint's Wiki solution is as good as any. Clearly a big hooray for Microsoft's marketing departments.
Another big nono that Microsoft faces is the fact that MS SharePoint is very 'document' centric. This document centric strategy is what made Microsoft great in the 90ties. However, a wiki is basically 'page' centric. Microsoft has become big on this document adagio, but it doesn't translate it well to wikis.
Usability
Overall, SharePoint has a considerable learning curve. It has too many bells and whistles. Granted, it can do everything from making coffee to walking the dog, but that is not always what you need. There is a definitive need for simplicity.
The conclusion
There are many more points the author makes, but we covered those relevant to WordonWiki. The view of the article is critical but offers many insights on the nature of how and why people use a wiki. We feel that we live up to that challenge with WordonWiki. However, the last word is always with the user. Please comment to give us feedback.
Dare to say what nobody dares to say
December 26th, 2009
Some times I come across a blog post that is so ad rem that I wish I had written it myself. One such blog post is "Thoughts on wikis" which you can find on the iperimeter blog.
From the article:
All wiki platforms I have used appear to make the following assumptions:
1) Formatting, beyond a very basic level, doesn't matter
2) People are prepared to put time and effort into learning and using the platform and/or its WYSIWYG editor
3) All content fits cleanly into a predefined structure
4) Once the information is in the wiki, people don't need to get it out again
5) Users are IT literate and have a conceptual interest in the wiki as a platform
I'd like add:
6) Users are able to figure out where to upload pictures so they can reference it using an Url
Of course, none of that is true. We are genuinely convinced that the true potential of wikis haven't even emerged. Once people can start to add content, move stuff around, do true WYSIWYG, all within the luxury of their familiar word processor, that's when we will start to see true content appearing.
Strangely, that is not the kind of comments you should make. Somehow, wikis still remain up to today a tool for the happy few. The technical thresholds seem to prevent many people from participating. Not a very democratic view. Along that same line, here is an other assumption that everybody seems to be making:
7) Wikis should all be open source and be free
That is true of course for the mother of all wikis: our beloved http://www.wikipedia.com. But even there, the money needs to come from somewhere.
We were even believing that for some time. Numerous people said that WordonWiki should really offer OpenOffice as an alternative editor. While that is certainly a feature on our backlog, interviews and usability sessions with real users have learned us that this is only a marginal request.
Let us know what you think.
Roland.
PS.
I was busy commenting this information on the author's blog, but some strange registration system was used. I had to login with my existing google or wordpress account. I did not feel comfortable doing that.