<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Reacties op: Why I don&#8217;t like SharePoint: Part I</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Sep 2010 18:16:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Door: Vladimir Kelman</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Vladimir Kelman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:06:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-16</guid>
		<description>I was happy when we gave up and switched from MOSS to a regular ASP.NET development. That huge attempt to make all-in-one machine failed as usual. Absolutely inflexible and inconvenient.

Here&#039;s our MOSS story:
http://pro-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-i-hate-ms-sharepoint.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was happy when we gave up and switched from MOSS to a regular ASP.NET development. That huge attempt to make all-in-one machine failed as usual. Absolutely inflexible and inconvenient.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s our MOSS story:<br />
<a href="http://pro-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-i-hate-ms-sharepoint.html" rel="nofollow">http://pro-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-i-hate-ms-sharepoint.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Door: Diesel</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Diesel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:14:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-15</guid>
		<description>I also don&#039;t get the people who just implemrnt too many functionality into sharepoint.

The break even point for just making a custom (web)application is reached much sooner then everybody thinks. When implemented, I think the custom application has a great advantage. It is just easier to add/change new (complex/not sharepoint standard) functionality.

Also the fantastic sharepoint websites can suck the life out of any server. THAT&#039;S WHAT YOU DON&#039;T WANT!

 1) It stores and consumes bits and bytes were even (Lord) Bill Gates didn&#039;t find them yet!

2) For some weird reason it performs like shit, maybe it has something to do with those bits and bytes.

Actually the people who want sharepoint as a functionality aren&#039;t stupid, all together with MS Dynamics. But all those tools in Dynamics and sharepoint etc just won&#039;t work perfectly together plug and play. And maintenance is expansive, because you have to train someone at age of 5. Never teach the child math. Teach him to write an _UnderScore_ before every word.

Sharepoint Olé!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also don&#8217;t get the people who just implemrnt too many functionality into sharepoint.</p>
<p>The break even point for just making a custom (web)application is reached much sooner then everybody thinks. When implemented, I think the custom application has a great advantage. It is just easier to add/change new (complex/not sharepoint standard) functionality.</p>
<p>Also the fantastic sharepoint websites can suck the life out of any server. THAT&#8217;S WHAT YOU DON&#8217;T WANT!</p>
<p> 1) It stores and consumes bits and bytes were even (Lord) Bill Gates didn&#8217;t find them yet!</p>
<p>2) For some weird reason it performs like shit, maybe it has something to do with those bits and bytes.</p>
<p>Actually the people who want sharepoint as a functionality aren&#8217;t stupid, all together with MS Dynamics. But all those tools in Dynamics and sharepoint etc just won&#8217;t work perfectly together plug and play. And maintenance is expansive, because you have to train someone at age of 5. Never teach the child math. Teach him to write an _UnderScore_ before every word.</p>
<p>Sharepoint Olé!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Door: Steven</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-14</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sure the SharePoint team made all these choices for a good reason, what I&#039;m trying to note here is that as a developer that isn&#039;t specifically trained in SharePoint some of these choices strike me as odd.

Why would you choose not to have a form of referential integrity in your lists?

In my opinion having a different internal and display name just adds unnecessary overhead to your C#/VB.NET code. If I were to give a piece of code that has some columns referencing to an internal name to another developer he would probably search for hours to eventually find out that he&#039;s been searching for the wrong name. I can imagine the code becoming a mess when you are constantly using internal names that you can&#039;t find in SharePoint because they&#039;ve been renamed.

Also, as Oppie noted, if I would want to retrieve the (reserved!) &quot;Name&quot; field, I need to make different code for an English or a Dutch installation. Retrieving the &quot;Name&quot; column simply won&#039;t work in the Dutch version. It&#039;s strange to me that what you could call the data layer in SharePoint is language dependant.

Isn&#039;t that at least somewhat weird?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sure the SharePoint team made all these choices for a good reason, what I&#8217;m trying to note here is that as a developer that isn&#8217;t specifically trained in SharePoint some of these choices strike me as odd.</p>
<p>Why would you choose not to have a form of referential integrity in your lists?</p>
<p>In my opinion having a different internal and display name just adds unnecessary overhead to your C#/VB.NET code. If I were to give a piece of code that has some columns referencing to an internal name to another developer he would probably search for hours to eventually find out that he&#8217;s been searching for the wrong name. I can imagine the code becoming a mess when you are constantly using internal names that you can&#8217;t find in SharePoint because they&#8217;ve been renamed.</p>
<p>Also, as Oppie noted, if I would want to retrieve the (reserved!) &#8220;Name&#8221; field, I need to make different code for an English or a Dutch installation. Retrieving the &#8220;Name&#8221; column simply won&#8217;t work in the Dutch version. It&#8217;s strange to me that what you could call the data layer in SharePoint is language dependant.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t that at least somewhat weird?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Door: Bazztrap</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Bazztrap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:35:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-13</guid>
		<description>..everything has a reason, if you look at the API.

You could get Field using GUID too.

Think about scenarios where you have a C# code in your web part to display  details where you are getting a field called &quot;Product&quot; based on which your entire code does some rendering. You deploy the solution for the customer. Now you have user using your wondrful web part but at same time you have contribute users who feel the need to call field name something else (let’s say Business_Prod)  Now if display name was always used to retrieve Field then your C# would have failed.

I do understand there are lot of grips about SharePoint i myself have a list of them.. but not this 2nd part, Share point list never maintains referential integrity between 2 lists. If you need to do that, you need to write custom even receiver like you have to write Triggers in Database.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>..everything has a reason, if you look at the API.</p>
<p>You could get Field using GUID too.</p>
<p>Think about scenarios where you have a C# code in your web part to display  details where you are getting a field called &#8220;Product&#8221; based on which your entire code does some rendering. You deploy the solution for the customer. Now you have user using your wondrful web part but at same time you have contribute users who feel the need to call field name something else (let’s say Business_Prod)  Now if display name was always used to retrieve Field then your C# would have failed.</p>
<p>I do understand there are lot of grips about SharePoint i myself have a list of them.. but not this 2nd part, Share point list never maintains referential integrity between 2 lists. If you need to do that, you need to write custom even receiver like you have to write Triggers in Database.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Door: MIP</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>MIP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Sounds like you want to do some more SharePoint development :P
Ow btw i think the nearest bridge is either in Hoensbroek over the highway or in Maastricht over the river Maas.

Nah just kiddin, just talk to our SharePoint boss im sure he will listen...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like you want to do some more SharePoint development <img src='http://www.dvolve.org/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Ow btw i think the nearest bridge is either in Hoensbroek over the highway or in Maastricht over the river Maas.</p>
<p>Nah just kiddin, just talk to our SharePoint boss im sure he will listen&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Door: Oppie</title>
		<link>http://www.dvolve.org/why-i-dont-like-sharepoint-part-i/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Oppie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.dvolve.org/?p=27#comment-11</guid>
		<description>As you know, I agree with this very much - and you didn&#039;t even mention the great differences between the Dutch and English installation that makes creating webparts that work correctly on both versions quite impossible.
I can&#039;t wait for part 2 so I can agree to that one too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As you know, I agree with this very much &#8211; and you didn&#8217;t even mention the great differences between the Dutch and English installation that makes creating webparts that work correctly on both versions quite impossible.<br />
I can&#8217;t wait for part 2 so I can agree to that one too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
