A Portal to a Portal

Dave - we are thinking of implementing Quickr. I am somewhat confused about the Domino and Java versions. We have no technology preferences and no desire to use other java based products such as Portal and also unlikely to move from Outlook to Notes so the question is purely functional - which provides the better features?

Jon
 

Hi Jon

Thanks for your comment. To be honest, it really depends on your requirements. As you rightly say, Quickr can be seen as a "black box" solution, where the underlying deployment choices become less relevant.

Therefore, your current, and potential future, requirements may help answer the question one way or the other.

The other thing that I'd add is that, from a purely personal perspective, the Java deployment of Quickr is potentially easier to theme and re-theme because it's using standard constructs such as Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) and HTML/JSP tags. In addition, it's based on the same re-usable component model as WebSphere Portal and Web Content Management use e.g. using authoring and presentation templates to separate content from process / presentation.

I guess, on the flip side, the Domino deployment would be easy to re-theme if you have a background in Domino design and build.

Does this help ?

Dave
 

Thanks Dave - I guess I just wanted to check whether there were any fundamental differences in terms of features and/or ease of use from a users perspective, or any use cases that can be met by one product, but not the other.

It sounds however that the differences are more on the infrastructure and customisation side?
 

Jon, I have a presentation that compares the two deployments of Quickr. Drop me an email, and I'll send it to you. Dave
 

Hi, would you be able to send me as well the comparison on two deployments ? thanks!! my email is james.gaines@troytech.net. Thanks!!