Hi,

We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the ready
components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0 will give
some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,

Thanks in advance
Aydin

Re: Useing WSS for company portal by Engelbert

Engelbert
Tue Jul 04 08:04:26 CDT 2006

Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use third-party
products to provide anything decent.

Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes quality
workflow out-of-the-box.

Engelbert

P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts and
tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf form
into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the stats of
our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy systems,
forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk (and
even then it won't be easy).

P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint land for
SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).


"AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
> Hi,
>
> We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
> publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the ready
> components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0 will give
> some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
>
> Thanks in advance
> Aydin



Re: Useing WSS for company portal by AydinDMZ

AydinDMZ
Tue Jul 04 10:40:02 CDT 2006

Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last quarter of
2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right solution. i
plan to move v3 when it is a need.

It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar this
kind technologies..

I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution just for a
company information portal, is it?

"Engelbert" wrote:

> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use third-party
> products to provide anything decent.
>
> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes quality
> workflow out-of-the-box.
>
> Engelbert
>
> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts and
> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf form
> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the stats of
> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy systems,
> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk (and
> even then it won't be easy).
>
> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint land for
> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
>
>
> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the ready
> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0 will give
> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> > Aydin
>
>
>

Re: Useing WSS for company portal by Engelbert

Engelbert
Tue Jul 04 10:47:45 CDT 2006

WSS is a good place to store information and to access it from.

SPS 2003 offers more functionality (but still doesn't have decent
workflow!).

Usually once the company is above a certain size it's obvious that there
will be a postive payback for the additional cost of SPS 2003.

But when talking about the word "portal" that's all I was talking about -
the *word*.

Whether you use WSSv2 or SPS 2003 depends on what you want to achieve with
the product. Apart from workflow, which neither have, what you said you
wanted seemed to suit WSSv2 (provided what you meant with legacy systems was
what I said we used it for).

Engelbert

"AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:64EC7EF2-7AB6-4DEE-A2A2-6B094D13D690@microsoft.com...
> Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last quarter
> of
> 2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right solution.
> i
> plan to move v3 when it is a need.
>
> It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar this
> kind technologies..
>
> I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution just for
> a
> company information portal, is it?
>
> "Engelbert" wrote:
>
>> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use third-party
>> products to provide anything decent.
>>
>> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes
>> quality
>> workflow out-of-the-box.
>>
>> Engelbert
>>
>> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts and
>> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf form
>> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the stats
>> of
>> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy systems,
>> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk
>> (and
>> even then it won't be easy).
>>
>> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint land
>> for
>> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
>>
>>
>> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
>> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the ready
>> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0 will
>> > give
>> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance
>> > Aydin
>>
>>
>>



Re: Useing WSS for company portal by AydinDMZ

AydinDMZ
Wed Jul 05 15:34:01 CDT 2006


Agree.. It depends what you want to have. I guess, I will be in group to
while start to implement v2.
Does it effect to use beta version, I couldn't decide to use v3. Do you have
any suggestion more over than workflow (actually about reliability of beta
version).

The other important subject is to upgrade system to SPS 2003. It brings so
much cost of ownership. Server license, web connector, CAL's and more..

Do you have any idea of the hosted sharepoint services, also. for example
APPTIX http://www.sharepointsite.com/

will be keep in touch, regards

"Engelbert" wrote:

> WSS is a good place to store information and to access it from.
>
> SPS 2003 offers more functionality (but still doesn't have decent
> workflow!).
>
> Usually once the company is above a certain size it's obvious that there
> will be a postive payback for the additional cost of SPS 2003.
>
> But when talking about the word "portal" that's all I was talking about -
> the *word*.
>
> Whether you use WSSv2 or SPS 2003 depends on what you want to achieve with
> the product. Apart from workflow, which neither have, what you said you
> wanted seemed to suit WSSv2 (provided what you meant with legacy systems was
> what I said we used it for).
>
> Engelbert
>
> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:64EC7EF2-7AB6-4DEE-A2A2-6B094D13D690@microsoft.com...
> > Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last quarter
> > of
> > 2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right solution.
> > i
> > plan to move v3 when it is a need.
> >
> > It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar this
> > kind technologies..
> >
> > I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution just for
> > a
> > company information portal, is it?
> >
> > "Engelbert" wrote:
> >
> >> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use third-party
> >> products to provide anything decent.
> >>
> >> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes
> >> quality
> >> workflow out-of-the-box.
> >>
> >> Engelbert
> >>
> >> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts and
> >> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf form
> >> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the stats
> >> of
> >> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy systems,
> >> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk
> >> (and
> >> even then it won't be easy).
> >>
> >> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint land
> >> for
> >> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
> >>
> >>
> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
> >> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the ready
> >> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0 will
> >> > give
> >> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks in advance
> >> > Aydin
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Re: Useing WSS for company portal by Engelbert

Engelbert
Thu Jul 06 01:02:18 CDT 2006

The beta version is fairly reliable, but it is a beta version and I wouldn't
run full-scale production on it. I would however run internal
proof-of-concepts on it in its present state. It doesn't crash. (touches
wood)

I agree on the costs of SPS 2003 and I don't know anything about the rules
for moving these licences across to MOSS 2007 so it might be wise before the
v3 products come out to just use the free WSSv2.

Sorry I haven't used a hosted service.

Engelbert

"AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:5BBDC2FD-BE01-4AEA-82FD-E80D7F42A0C5@microsoft.com...
>
> Agree.. It depends what you want to have. I guess, I will be in group to
> while start to implement v2.
> Does it effect to use beta version, I couldn't decide to use v3. Do you
> have
> any suggestion more over than workflow (actually about reliability of beta
> version).
>
> The other important subject is to upgrade system to SPS 2003. It brings so
> much cost of ownership. Server license, web connector, CAL's and more..
>
> Do you have any idea of the hosted sharepoint services, also. for example
> APPTIX http://www.sharepointsite.com/
>
> will be keep in touch, regards
>
> "Engelbert" wrote:
>
>> WSS is a good place to store information and to access it from.
>>
>> SPS 2003 offers more functionality (but still doesn't have decent
>> workflow!).
>>
>> Usually once the company is above a certain size it's obvious that there
>> will be a postive payback for the additional cost of SPS 2003.
>>
>> But when talking about the word "portal" that's all I was talking about -
>> the *word*.
>>
>> Whether you use WSSv2 or SPS 2003 depends on what you want to achieve
>> with
>> the product. Apart from workflow, which neither have, what you said you
>> wanted seemed to suit WSSv2 (provided what you meant with legacy systems
>> was
>> what I said we used it for).
>>
>> Engelbert
>>
>> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:64EC7EF2-7AB6-4DEE-A2A2-6B094D13D690@microsoft.com...
>> > Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last
>> > quarter
>> > of
>> > 2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right
>> > solution.
>> > i
>> > plan to move v3 when it is a need.
>> >
>> > It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar
>> > this
>> > kind technologies..
>> >
>> > I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution just
>> > for
>> > a
>> > company information portal, is it?
>> >
>> > "Engelbert" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use
>> >> third-party
>> >> products to provide anything decent.
>> >>
>> >> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes
>> >> quality
>> >> workflow out-of-the-box.
>> >>
>> >> Engelbert
>> >>
>> >> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts
>> >> and
>> >> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf
>> >> form
>> >> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the
>> >> stats
>> >> of
>> >> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy
>> >> systems,
>> >> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk
>> >> (and
>> >> even then it won't be easy).
>> >>
>> >> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint
>> >> land
>> >> for
>> >> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
>> >> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the
>> >> > ready
>> >> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0
>> >> > will
>> >> > give
>> >> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks in advance
>> >> > Aydin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>



Re: Useing WSS for company portal by AydinDMZ

AydinDMZ
Thu Jul 06 10:12:02 CDT 2006

Finally i installed WSS 2 for the test puposes :))

Had alot of things to do.. But 2 questions for the moment ..
1. I couldn't change the language to Turkish, on top site and the sub sites
also,
2. How can I add the sites to quick lunch bar. On the default theme, there
is no zone to change for quick lunch. Must be some vay to add them to bar.

By the way, I would like to thanks for four valuable feedbacks.
Regards

"Engelbert" wrote:

> The beta version is fairly reliable, but it is a beta version and I wouldn't
> run full-scale production on it. I would however run internal
> proof-of-concepts on it in its present state. It doesn't crash. (touches
> wood)
>
> I agree on the costs of SPS 2003 and I don't know anything about the rules
> for moving these licences across to MOSS 2007 so it might be wise before the
> v3 products come out to just use the free WSSv2.
>
> Sorry I haven't used a hosted service.
>
> Engelbert
>
> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:5BBDC2FD-BE01-4AEA-82FD-E80D7F42A0C5@microsoft.com...
> >
> > Agree.. It depends what you want to have. I guess, I will be in group to
> > while start to implement v2.
> > Does it effect to use beta version, I couldn't decide to use v3. Do you
> > have
> > any suggestion more over than workflow (actually about reliability of beta
> > version).
> >
> > The other important subject is to upgrade system to SPS 2003. It brings so
> > much cost of ownership. Server license, web connector, CAL's and more..
> >
> > Do you have any idea of the hosted sharepoint services, also. for example
> > APPTIX http://www.sharepointsite.com/
> >
> > will be keep in touch, regards
> >
> > "Engelbert" wrote:
> >
> >> WSS is a good place to store information and to access it from.
> >>
> >> SPS 2003 offers more functionality (but still doesn't have decent
> >> workflow!).
> >>
> >> Usually once the company is above a certain size it's obvious that there
> >> will be a postive payback for the additional cost of SPS 2003.
> >>
> >> But when talking about the word "portal" that's all I was talking about -
> >> the *word*.
> >>
> >> Whether you use WSSv2 or SPS 2003 depends on what you want to achieve
> >> with
> >> the product. Apart from workflow, which neither have, what you said you
> >> wanted seemed to suit WSSv2 (provided what you meant with legacy systems
> >> was
> >> what I said we used it for).
> >>
> >> Engelbert
> >>
> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:64EC7EF2-7AB6-4DEE-A2A2-6B094D13D690@microsoft.com...
> >> > Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last
> >> > quarter
> >> > of
> >> > 2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right
> >> > solution.
> >> > i
> >> > plan to move v3 when it is a need.
> >> >
> >> > It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar
> >> > this
> >> > kind technologies..
> >> >
> >> > I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution just
> >> > for
> >> > a
> >> > company information portal, is it?
> >> >
> >> > "Engelbert" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use
> >> >> third-party
> >> >> products to provide anything decent.
> >> >>
> >> >> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes
> >> >> quality
> >> >> workflow out-of-the-box.
> >> >>
> >> >> Engelbert
> >> >>
> >> >> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting charts
> >> >> and
> >> >> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf
> >> >> form
> >> >> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the
> >> >> stats
> >> >> of
> >> >> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy
> >> >> systems,
> >> >> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with BizTalk
> >> >> (and
> >> >> even then it won't be easy).
> >> >>
> >> >> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint
> >> >> land
> >> >> for
> >> >> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly content
> >> >> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the
> >> >> > ready
> >> >> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0
> >> >> > will
> >> >> > give
> >> >> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks in advance
> >> >> > Aydin
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Re: Useing WSS for company portal by Engelbert

Engelbert
Thu Jul 06 12:05:29 CDT 2006

There is I think a Turkish version of WSS v2. You should install that rather
than the English version.

If you already have installed the English version and don't want to do a
re-install with the Turkish version, you can run the Multi-language add-on.
(www.wssfaq.com/ MS Articles / Downloads category for a link) but then I
think you can't change the language of the top-site.

I would in any case if I were you do a re-install with the Turkish version.

Add sites to Quick Launch bar.

You can add code (<A http=...>Title</A> to the defauult.aspx page (for
instance with FP 2003. I would personally add Sites below the Quick Launch
bar or would put them in a Links list and put the web part of that Links
list below the Quick Launch bar.

(Experiment with this a bit before you ask questions on it)

Engelbert



"AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9FDF55F1-5D67-4055-9593-EFFAE2E3C769@microsoft.com...
> Finally i installed WSS 2 for the test puposes :))
>
> Had alot of things to do.. But 2 questions for the moment ..
> 1. I couldn't change the language to Turkish, on top site and the sub
> sites
> also,
> 2. How can I add the sites to quick lunch bar. On the default theme, there
> is no zone to change for quick lunch. Must be some vay to add them to bar.
>
> By the way, I would like to thanks for four valuable feedbacks.
> Regards
>
> "Engelbert" wrote:
>
>> The beta version is fairly reliable, but it is a beta version and I
>> wouldn't
>> run full-scale production on it. I would however run internal
>> proof-of-concepts on it in its present state. It doesn't crash. (touches
>> wood)
>>
>> I agree on the costs of SPS 2003 and I don't know anything about the
>> rules
>> for moving these licences across to MOSS 2007 so it might be wise before
>> the
>> v3 products come out to just use the free WSSv2.
>>
>> Sorry I haven't used a hosted service.
>>
>> Engelbert
>>
>> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:5BBDC2FD-BE01-4AEA-82FD-E80D7F42A0C5@microsoft.com...
>> >
>> > Agree.. It depends what you want to have. I guess, I will be in group
>> > to
>> > while start to implement v2.
>> > Does it effect to use beta version, I couldn't decide to use v3. Do you
>> > have
>> > any suggestion more over than workflow (actually about reliability of
>> > beta
>> > version).
>> >
>> > The other important subject is to upgrade system to SPS 2003. It brings
>> > so
>> > much cost of ownership. Server license, web connector, CAL's and more..
>> >
>> > Do you have any idea of the hosted sharepoint services, also. for
>> > example
>> > APPTIX http://www.sharepointsite.com/
>> >
>> > will be keep in touch, regards
>> >
>> > "Engelbert" wrote:
>> >
>> >> WSS is a good place to store information and to access it from.
>> >>
>> >> SPS 2003 offers more functionality (but still doesn't have decent
>> >> workflow!).
>> >>
>> >> Usually once the company is above a certain size it's obvious that
>> >> there
>> >> will be a postive payback for the additional cost of SPS 2003.
>> >>
>> >> But when talking about the word "portal" that's all I was talking
>> >> about -
>> >> the *word*.
>> >>
>> >> Whether you use WSSv2 or SPS 2003 depends on what you want to achieve
>> >> with
>> >> the product. Apart from workflow, which neither have, what you said
>> >> you
>> >> wanted seemed to suit WSSv2 (provided what you meant with legacy
>> >> systems
>> >> was
>> >> what I said we used it for).
>> >>
>> >> Engelbert
>> >>
>> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:64EC7EF2-7AB6-4DEE-A2A2-6B094D13D690@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Right, but v3 still beta and will (hopefully) published in last
>> >> > quarter
>> >> > of
>> >> > 2006. I thougth this will be the starting point for the right
>> >> > solution.
>> >> > i
>> >> > plan to move v3 when it is a need.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is not easy to move people to a large system, who is not familiar
>> >> > this
>> >> > kind technologies..
>> >> >
>> >> > I had some feelings from your words, wss is not a quite solution
>> >> > just
>> >> > for
>> >> > a
>> >> > company information portal, is it?
>> >> >
>> >> > "Engelbert" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Forget v2 as far as workflow is concerned. You'll need to use
>> >> >> third-party
>> >> >> products to provide anything decent.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Instead spend your time on getting up to speed on v3 which includes
>> >> >> quality
>> >> >> workflow out-of-the-box.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Engelbert
>> >> >>
>> >> >> P.S. "Reporting some legacy info" - if all you mean is putting
>> >> >> charts
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> tables that derive from legacy systems in (say) .doc; .xls or .pdf
>> >> >> form
>> >> >> into WSS doc libs, that is fine and is what we do to show users the
>> >> >> stats
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> our mainframe systems. If you mean on-line live data from legacy
>> >> >> systems,
>> >> >> forget WSS and think of SPS 2003 (or MOSS 2007) together with
>> >> >> BizTalk
>> >> >> (and
>> >> >> even then it won't be easy).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> P.P.S. Avoid use of "portal" with WSS - it's reserved in SharePoint
>> >> >> land
>> >> >> for
>> >> >> SPS 2003 (SharePoint Portal Server).
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "AydinDMZ" <AydinDMZ@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:341222AB-7576-43D4-9AC9-9E730B7CC31E@microsoft.com...
>> >> >> > Hi,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > We plan to use WSS 2.0 as a company portal solution..(mainly
>> >> >> > content
>> >> >> > publishing, workflow and reporting some legacy info). Within the
>> >> >> > ready
>> >> >> > components, It seams to be a good starting point and version 3.0
>> >> >> > will
>> >> >> > give
>> >> >> > some extra features also. I would like to have your opinnion,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Thanks in advance
>> >> >> > Aydin
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>