How to Personalize Your SharePoint Lists
November 18, 2011
Lately, we’ve been bringing SharePoint articles that focus on a list of some sort. Now we bring you an article that is centered on “Setting Query String Values on SharePoint Forms Using XSLT and Javascript” from the Sieena blog. In layman’s terms, it gives tips on working with list within SharePoint. How great is that?!
“In some cases, you may want to show your SharePoint list forms (new, edit, display, etc) in a specific layout or showing/hiding values to your will, this is something you cannot do using out of the box SharePoint list forms. But there’s a way to do this, and even take query string values as parameters: using javascript and XSLT data views on your forms.”
It gets even better! The process to personalize your SharePoint is outlined in a list. So it’s a useful article about manipulating javascript and XLST data on lists with a list of steps. In the manner of lists, it’s pretty straight-forward with small steps you need to follow with the new code at the end. If you want to personalize your SharePoint Search as well, Search Technologies‘ engineers can tailor almost any aspect of SharePoint and tune SharePoint search so it delivers a solid return on investment.
Iain Fletcher, November 18, 2011
Mindbreeze Demystifies Enterprise
November 16, 2011
SharePoint is supposed to be a broad-based solution to solve the enterprise needs of most users. However, there seems to be quite a bit of buzz regarding additional trainings, conferences, and webinars geared toward equipping installers and users on the ins-and-outs of the program. One such list of recommendations can be found here, at “Staffing is key to a successful SharePoint Server 2010 deployment.”
The author, Brien Posey, acknowledges that SharePoint 2010 deployment is happening at a rapid rate, but many are finding the process to be lengthier and more complicated than expected. Here is some of his advice:
“The key to assessing SharePoint staffing needs rests with determining the kind of expertise required for deployment and its long-term administration, and then mapping those requirements to staff roles. Some of those roles can likely be filled by existing members of the IT staff, but organizations might have to make additional hires.”
Posey goes on to provide a lengthy list of staff positions for consideration, architects and administrators galore. Couple this recommendation with the recent boom in SharePoint training opportunities and one has to wonder if SharePoint is not as effortless as advertised. It seems implementation and usage are both fairly complicated.
We like what we are hearing about Fabasoft Mindbreeze and its suite of solutions. Implementation is reportedly intuitive and seamless. However, if problems do arise, solutions can quickly be found via brief tutorials or online training opportunities. Don’t be trapped by SharePoint. Consult the Mindbreeze suite of solutions and see if they might be the right choice for your organization.
*Disclaimer – Mindbreeze is currently upgrading their website. Links will be checked and if problems arise they will be updated. Thanks for your patience.
Emily Rae Aldridge, November 16, 2011
Up the Value Chain: Open Source Plus Commercial Know How
November 15, 2011
Along with open source applications comes a certain amount of risk. A recent article on Network World, titled “Advocating Open Source Management Can Be a Disaster,” explores how to balance praising the new technology and warning of the possible risks inherent.
Comparing open source technology to a four year old running free in a parking lot the article recommends combining praise for the gift of open source while keeping just the right amount of responsibility by reminding users of the risks.
The article provides several recommendations including some typical ones: be an expert in the area in which you are preaching and have buddies to back you up. They also suggest the following:
Associate with the mainstream- Communicate that having policies and procedures for managing risk are a normal part of doing business. (That’s what Sarbanes Oxley is about.) Managing how open source is used in software development is just another process like managing requirements, quality, security or issue tracking.
With so much at risk with this revolutionizing technology it pays to make sure the risk is managed right the first time. Companies which specialize in information management can offers its clients open source content connectors. Licensees can use these to handle many content acquisition needs.
After reading this information, I realized that the Paris-based Polyspot offers tools and know how which can deliver open source plus commercial know how. Whether infrastructure, search, or management processes in work flow, Polyspot is delivering.
Stephen E Arnold, November 15, 2011
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Business Process Is Not Information Management
November 15, 2011
We continue to run across some interesting stories about Enterprise Data. This one from Catherine Lamsfuss caused quite a debate at lunch. Here’s what we read:
As the amount of data within a business or industry grows the question of what to do with it arises. The article, “Business Process Management and Mastering Data in the Enterprise“, on Capgemini’s website explains how Business Process Management (BPM) is not the ideal means for managing data.
According the article as more and more operations are used to store data the process of synchronizing the data becomes increasingly difficult.
As for using BPM to do the job, the article explains,
While BPM tools have the infrastructure to do hold a data model and integrate to multiple core systems, the process of mastering the data can become complex and, as the program expands across ever more systems, the challenges can become unmanageable. In my view, BPMS solutions with a few exceptions are not the right place to be managing core data[i]. At the enterprise level MDM solutions are for more elegant solutions designed specifically for this purpose.
The answer to this ever-growing problem was happened upon by combining knowledge from both a data perspective and a process perspective. The article suggests that a Target Operating Model (TOM) would act as a rudder for the projects aimed at synchronizing data. After that was in place a common information model be created with enterprise definitions of the data entities which then would be populated by general attributes fed by a single process project.
While this is just one man’s answer to the problem of data, it is a start. Regardless of how businesses approach the problem it remains constant–process management alone is not efficient enough to meet the demands of data management.
“It’s not the process its the people that implement and use the process that matter” stated Jasmine Ashton in a final summary of the lunch debate. We had to agree. However, as we looked through the Polyspot data management description that Ms. Lamsfuss’ article pointed us to we had to agree that starting with a good technology implementation could go a long way towards helping the people follow the processes.
Constance Ard November 15, 2011
Recommind Named 193 in Deloitte Technology Fast 500
November 12, 2011
In case you missed it because this business was moving so darned fast it did not register, predictive information management software company Recommind was recently ranked 193 in the Deloitte 2011 Technology Fast 500.
The Fast 500 is a prestigious ranking of the 500 fastest-growing technology, media, telecommunications, life sciences and clean technology companies in North America. Rankings are based on percentage of fiscal year revenue growth during the period from 2006-2010, in which time Recommind’s revenue grew 416 percent.
In the November 1st new release “Recommind Again Named One of North America’s Fastest Growing Companies in Deloitte 2011 Technology Fast 500” Recommind CEO Robert Tennant said:
“One of the few constants in modern business is the exponential increase in corporate data.The struggle to find relevant information is draining the resources of the world’s largest organizations. It affects everyone from the CEO to the director of IT to the in-house counsel to the average employee just trying to find an email. Fortune 500 companies are desperate for a new approach to information management, which is exactly what we give them with products like Axcelerate eDiscovery, Decisiv Search and Decisiv Email.”
I think we’re all excited to see where this company is headed and to watch it stretch and grow.
Jasmine Ashton, November 12, 2011
Apple and Google: Too Big to Flail?
November 9, 2011
The game is in its final seconds, a key player gets the ball and flails helplessly as the ball is fumbled. Game over. Football, however, is not life.
That is a plus for both Apple and Google. At lunch today (November 4, 2011),one of the goslings mentioned the appear and and disappearance of the Google Gmail app for the iPhone. I don’t use an iPhone. I don’t use Gmail but I do have an account. I don’t need an app. A phone is for talking. I have another gizmo for email, thank you. With lousy eyes, I can’t see the tiny screens which are made for 12 year olds, not 67 year old geese.
According to CBS News, “Google Flubs Its First iPhone Gmail App.” I suppose when regular TV reports a fumble, I should care. I don’t, but I think there is a lesson in the general release of software with a “bug”. I liked the alleged comment by the pre-eminent Google: “Sorry. We messed up.”
Okay. Flail. Not football.
Then someone mentioned that her nifty iPhone 4S was really annoying. I asked, “Does it make calls?” The answer: “Yes.”
I asked, “What’s wrong with the gizmo?” She said, “The voice recognition thing is not working.”
Okay, fumble. Apparently, the death of Steve Jobs has left Apple in a tough spot. A key feature does not work and there is no one to fire off snappy emails in the pre-dawn hours.
According to the Washington Post’s “Apple’s Siri Shows She’s Only a Beta,”
Owners of the iPhone 4S, some of whom are still dealing with the battery drain issues from iOS 5, were further disappointed Thursday when Siri, the automated personal assistant on the phone, took some unapproved personal leave. Siri seemed to be back in service by late Thursday evening.
Another flail. Not a game. Just customers. Who cares?
A tip of the managerial hat to http://jeffreykrames.com/2009/10/12/a-person-could-be-the-biggest-unforced-error-of-all/
As my wont, I see these two events without the personal annoyance that customers of Google and Apple may experience. I don’t really care about either of the two companies.
Protected: Learn about the New SharePoint 2010 Online for Office 365
November 8, 2011
Business Process Management: Bit Player or Buzz Word?
November 7, 2011
I spoke with one of the goslings who produces content for our different information services. We were reviewing a draft of a write up, and I reacted negatively to the source document and to the wild and crazy notions that find their way into the discussions about “problems” and “challenges” in information technology.
In enterprise search and content management, flag waving is more important than solving customers’ problems. Economic pressure seems to exponentiate the marketing clutter. Are companies with resources “too big to flail””? Nope.
Here’s the draft, and I have put in bold face the parts that caught my attention and push back:
As the amount of data within a business or industry grows the question of what to do with it arises. The article, “Business Process Management and Mastering Data in the Enterprise“, on Capgemini’s Web site explains how Business Process Management (BPM) is not the ideal means for managing data.
According the article as more and more operations are used to store data the process of synchronizing the data becomes increasingly difficult.
As for using BPM to do the job, the article explains,
While BPM tools have the infrastructure to do hold a data model and integrate to multiple core systems, the process of mastering the data can become complex and, as the program expands across ever more systems, the challenges can become unmanageable. In my view, BPMS solutions with a few exceptions are not the right place to be managing core data[i]. At the enterprise level MDM solutions are for more elegant solutions designed specifically for this purpose.
The answer to this ever-growing problem was happened upon by combining knowledge from both a data perspective and a process perspective. The article suggests that a Target Operating Model (TOM) would act as a rudder for the projects aimed at synchronizing data. After that was in place a common information model be created with enterprise definitions of the data entities which then would be populated by general attributes fed by a single process project.
While this is just one man’s answer to the problem of data, it is a start. Regardless of how businesses approach the problem it remains constant–process management alone is not efficient enough to meet the demands of data management.
Here’s my concern. First, I think there are a number of concepts, shibboleths, and smoke screens flying, floating, and flapping. The conceptual clutter is crazy. The “real” journalists dutifully cover these “signals”. My hunch is that most of the folks who like videos gobble these pronouncements like Centrum multivitamins. The idea is that one doze with lots of “stuff” will prevent information technology problems from wrecking havoc on an organization.
Three observations:
First, I think that in the noise, quite interesting and very useful approaches to enterprise information management can get lost. Two good examples. Polyspot in France and Digital Reasoning in the U.S. Both companies have approaches which solve some tough problems. Polyspot offers and infrastructure, search, and apps approach. Digital Reasoning delivers next-generation numerical recipes, what the company calls entity based analytics. Baloney like Target Operating Models do not embrace these quite useful technologies.
Second, the sensitivity of indexes and blogs to public relations spam is increasing. The perception that indexing systems are “objective” is fascinating, just incorrect. What happens then is that a well heeled firm can output a sequence of spam news releases and then sit back and watch the “real” journalists pick up the arguments and ideas. I wrote about one example of this in “A Coming Dust Up between Oracle and MarkLogic?”
Third, I am considering a longer essai about the problem of confusing Barbara, Desdemona’s mother’s maid, with Othello. Examples include confusing technical methods or standards with magic potions; for instance, taxonomies as a “fix” for lousy findability and search, semantics as a work around for poorly written information, metatagging as a solution to context free messages, etc. What’s happening is that a supporting character, probably added by the compilers of Shakespeare’s First Folio edition is made into the protagonist. Since many recent college graduates don’t know much about Othello, talking about Barbara as the possible name of the man who played the role in the 17th century is a waste of time. The response I get when I mention “Barbara” when discussing the play is, “Who?” This problem is surfacing in discussions of technology. XML, for example, is not a rabbit from a hat. XML is a way to describe the rabbit-hat-magician content and slice and dice the rabbit-hat-magician without too many sliding panels and dim lights.
What is the relation of this management and method malarkey? Sales, gentle reader, sales. Hyperbole, spam, and jargon are Teflon to get a deal.
Stephen E Arnold, November 7, 2011
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Protected: Activating Keyword Search in SharePoint 2010
November 7, 2011
SharePoint and Its Sometimes Interesting Costs
November 3, 2011
SharePoint is touted as the ultimate solution to content management and collaboration for enterprises. Microsoft, however, never discusses the costs associated with their software, except for how it’s cost effective and overtime will save your business money. But is that true? Redmondmag.com posted an enlightening article about the hidden costs involved in a SharePoint project, “Study: SharePoint Costs High Due to Inadequate Skills.”
A study conducted by the Azaleos Corp. discovered that the average cost to run SharePoint per user is $46/month. Using Microsoft Exchange proved to be cheaper at $15-15/month per user. SharePoint users also cited downtime as the most common problem.
“The downtime mostly stemmed from hardware errors or mistakes made by IT team members. Those problems caused average monthly management costs for SharePoint to double to around $90 per user per month. Almost half (43 percent) of study respondents pointed to “a lack of administrator skills, training, and knowledge as an inhibitor to efficiently leveraging SharePoint.”
SharePoint is still a young piece of software with a manifest destiny for its future. Its problems are many, but there are a lot of third party solutions to resolve them. At the end of the article, Azaleos Corp. advertises it’s AzaleosX app to help increase uptime.
We believe that you may want to take a close look at the cost effective search and content processing solution from SurfRay. Contain costs and improve user satisfaction with one snap in for SharePoint.
Whitney Grace, November 3, 2011
SurfRay
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
