Documentum Contributor Interfaces – D2, Webtop, HPI, and xCP

Part 1 – Document Creation, Checkout, and Checkin

After receiving some positive feedback on a previous post comparing the search functionality of Webtop, D2, HPI, and xCP, we decided to continue with our product comparison.   This post will compare Webtop, D2, HPI and xCP for

From our experience, the user interface for consumers (those who use the system primarily for searching and retrieving content) is the most important when evaluating the overall success of an ECM implementation.  As with the consumer functionality, we’ve posted a video comparing the contributor functionality available in Webtop, D2, HPI, and xCP.  Once again, each interface was evaluated based on what was configurable using the out-of-the-box product, without any coding or customization.  This post focuses on some of the highlights of document creation, checkout, and checkin.

Content Transfer Methods

One of the major differences we found when comparing the contributor functionality of Webtop, D2, HPI, and xCP is the method that each product uses for transferring content to and from the repository for checkin, checkout, and import operations.  Each product utilizes browser plugins to manage various components of content transfer.

Before diving into the details of each product, we thought we’d share some thoughts about browser plugins.  Plugins, in general, help to enhance the user experience by providing functionality that’s impossible to achieve by just using HTML.  Plugins are commonly used for animations, streaming video, and multi-file upload.  Plugins generally utilize the ActiveX framework, Java applets, or Adobe Flash.

As useful as they are, plugins can pose problems because they require software to be downloaded to the client PC.  These downloads can be difficult to rollout on an enterprise level due to security restrictions.  After all, plugins inherently provide web applications access to the file system on the client PC, which is often a large security hurdle to get over.

Plugins can also be problematic when considering the compatibility between versions, operating systems, and browsers.  In corporations where all PCs have the same image and installs and updates are centrally managed, it’s less of an issue because all PCs have the same software installed.  More often than not, a common PC image for an entire company is never a reality because some users are granted admin rights to their PCs.  Many companies also make their ECM web interfaces available over an extranet, opening up the user base to a variety of browsers, operating systems, Java, and Flash versions.

Webtop and xCP utilize Unified Content Facilities (UCF) to perform content transfer.  UCF is a Java applet developed by EMC and is used by every content transfer operation in Webtop and xCP.  These operations include checkin, checkout, cancel checkout, edit, import, and export.  UCF allows Webtop to behave more like a desktop application.

The Good

• • Users do not have to specify a folder location when editing and checking out content
• • Users do not have to browse for files on their PC when checking in content
• • When viewing non-PDF content (Word, Excel, etc.), content is downloaded and launched in the native application without having to save a local copy first
• • Multiple files can be imported in a single operation
• • Files can be dragged and dropped into the browser for importing
• • UCF utilizes Java, which is supported by most modern browsers (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Safari)

The Bad

• • UCF requires that the client PC have the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) installed
• • UCF is only supported on certain versions of the Java Runtime Environment (JRE) and has proven to be incompatible with unsupported JRE versions
• • Elevated browser security may be required to install the UCF plugin
• • Most users have grown accustomed to working with web based applications.  Some of the desktop-like functionality provided by UCF may go unused (drag and drop) or even confuse users (“I just checked out a document, but where did it go on my hard drive?”)

D2 is built entirely within an ActiveX plugin, utilizing none of the browser’s built-in functionality other than launching the ActiveX plugin.  Because D2 is built entirely as an ActiveX application, it looks and behaves more like a desktop application than a web application.

The Good

• • Users do not have to specify a folder location when editing and checking out content
• • Users do not have to browse for files on their PC when checking in content
• • When viewing non-PDF content (Word, Excel, etc.), content is downloaded and launched in the native application without having to save a local copy first
• • Multiple files can be imported in a single operation
• • Files can be dragged and dropped into the browser for importing

The Bad

• • D2 utilizes ActiveX, which is only supported in Microsoft Internet Explorer running on a Windows operating system
• • Admin privileges are required to install the D2 ActiveX plugin on the client machine
• • Most users have grown accustomed to working with web based applications.  Some of the desktop-like functionality provided by D2 may go unused or even confuse users.

High Performance Interface (HPI) is built almost entirely using web technologies (HTML, JavaScript, and CSS).  HPI uses a Flash plugin for multi-file upload only.

The Good

• • With exception of using Adobe Flash Player for multi-file upload, HPI does not require any software or plugin installation
• • Adobe Flash Player is supported by most modern browsers (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Safari
• • HPI provides a user experience that is aligned with most other web applications
• • Multiple files can be imported in a single operation

The Bad

• • Users see an “Open/Save” dialog when checking out content, requiring them to specify a location to save the content to while editing
  • Users must browse for a file on their PC when checking in content
  • With exception of PDF content that launches in Adobe Reader, users have to go through an “Open/Save” dialog when viewing content
  • Drag and drop features are not supported for import

Overall Thoughts

When considering options in a Documentum contributor interface, it’s also important to consider any plugins that need to be installed with the product.  Plugins should be evaluated not only on the user experience, but also on security and the OS and software requirements of the application.

While the desktop-like user experience that Webtop, D2, and xCP try to deliver offers a lot of features, it begs the question of whether these interfaces are hanging on to old desktop applications features.  Does anyone remember WorkSpace and Desktop Client?  Many of today’s business application users are accustomed to working in streamlined web applications like HPI that require manually saving and uploading files from their PC.

Hopefully this post has shed some light on some of the options available for Documentum contributor interfaces.  Look for future posts that compare additional contributor functionality of Webtop, D2, HPI, and xCP.