Post details: Portal comparison: Liferay v. uPortal

Apr 26, 2006 : Portal comparison: Liferay v. uPortal

For Cornerstone University's portal we decided to switch from our planned uPortal 2.5.1 implementation to use Liferay 3.6.1 instead. Several people have wondered why. Here's a few comparisons:

Feature Liferay uPortal
Customization AJAX drag & drop much more difficult, but slightly more options
User/group data integration Must use its own SQL tables (we wrote scripts to insert into those) Can map to remote SQL, LDAP, etc
Community big, but often unanswered questions in forum Smaller, seems more helpful, focused on higher-ed
Bundled portlets/channels A lot (78). We use several (RSS, menu navigation, portlet aggregrator, Wiki display, weather) Few, none of which provided much value to us
Themeing easy hard (~3 layers of abstraction)
Pretty URLs yes no
Layouts each group you are a part of has a layout (page) hierarchy; this works very well for us. We did have to write a Java utility to insert similar layouts into similar groups Don't think there is a way for heirachy of pages; each user's layout can appear different based on what groups they are in
Portlet hotdeploy yes no (?)
CAS for authentication yes yes
Installation into app server Messy; requires putting lots of jars into common Clean; the portal is just one webapp

A very good comparison of these and more portals:

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Jason Shao [Visitor] ·
Were any of these items in particular deal-breakers/decision points?
Permalink 04/26/06 @ 16:22
Comment from: Dave Brondsema [Member] ·
The better usability, especially with drag-and-drop customization was very important. Ease of theming was also important since we had limited time. And then the way layouts and menus turned out ended up being a very nice bonus (something we hadn't fully understood before we made our decision).
Permalink 04/26/06 @ 16:33
Comment from: Derek Alexander [Visitor] ·
Interesting post. What about Jetspeed2 - did you consider that at all?

Permalink 04/28/06 @ 06:57
Comment from: Brian Kim [Visitor] ·
With Liferay 4.0, you now have the ability to create hot deployable template files which provide full flexibility of how to layout portlets on a page.

Also with 4.0, depending on the app server you use (Liferay can deploy on almost any app server), you can avoid placing jars into "common".


Brian Kim
Liferay, LLC
Permalink 06/19/06 @ 16:30
Comment from: dushan [Visitor]
i need to integrate jetspeed2 with ja-sig CAS is there any way to achive this i looked in net and there it say we just need write a provider interface.what this mean how can i achive this please help me
Permalink 03/13/07 @ 08:35
Comment from: Sang Nguyen [Visitor]
Please help me, I deployed a portlet JSR 168 by Sun's Netbean by Liferay server but could'nt run ! Could you tell me what I need notices when I deploy? surely that portlet ran very good by Netbean tool.
Permalink 07/17/07 @ 09:42
Comment from: Terence [Visitor] ·
Interesting post. Would love to see it again with the current versions of these applications.

Lots of schools will be switching to Liferay/Luminis instead of uPortal/Luminis in the next year or so.
Permalink 08/06/10 @ 19:19

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.
What is the 2-letter abbreviation for Michigan?
Allowed XHTML tags: <p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small>
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email & url)

<  December 2019  >
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          




Syndicate this blog XML

powered by