Gladinet CentreStack vs Microsoft SharePoint: Cloud Enablement vs Full Migration (2026)

Every MSP with file-server customers has had this conversation. The customer wants cloud access for hybrid workers. The MSP recommends SharePoint. The customer looks at the migration cost (data migration, permission remapping, user retraining, workflow disruption) and asks if there's another way.

Gladinet CentreStack is the 'other way' answer. Install CentreStack on the existing Windows file server, point it at the existing SMB shares, and users get cloud access to their file server through a web browser, a mobile app, or a drive-letter mapping on their laptop. NTFS permissions, existing folder structures, drive letters, and file-locking all keep working. The migration is effectively zero.

SharePoint is the right answer when the goal is deep Microsoft 365 integration, everyone working in Teams channels, co-authoring Office documents, and running Power Platform workflows against the content. For customers who want that, pay for the migration.

For customers who just want remote access to 'the H drive', CentreStack is the pragmatic answer and it's been our recommended path for MSPs serving mid-market Australian businesses for years.

The preservation story is the core of CentreStack's value. Four things survive the deployment:

NTFS permissions. The file server's existing ACLs work unchanged. No remapping, no least-privilege audit, no 'who had access to this folder under the old system' conversations. SharePoint's permission model is its own system with its own idioms; NTFS-to-SharePoint-permission mapping is never 1:1.

Folder structure. CentreStack exposes the existing folder tree as-is. Users navigate through the browser or mobile app the same way they navigate the file server. No re-teaching users how to find their documents.

Drive letters. The CentreStack client mounts the cloud-accessible shares as drive letters on users' laptops. H: keeps being H:. Line-of-business applications that hardcode drive paths keep working.

File locking. CentreStack honours Windows file locks, so Excel and AutoCAD and other file-lock-dependent applications continue to work as users expect.

SharePoint forces a model shift across all four. For some environments that shift is worth the cost; for others it's a migration project that delivers little user-visible value.

Pretending CentreStack is the right answer for every customer would be dishonest. SharePoint genuinely wins in several situations.

Deep Teams integration. If your customers live in Teams channels, co-author Office documents in real time, and use Teams files tabs as the primary content access pattern, SharePoint is the native backend. CentreStack can work with Teams but the integration is shallower.

Power Platform workflows. Power Automate and Power Apps have deep SharePoint integration. Building workflow automation against SharePoint content is idiomatic. Building it against CentreStack-exposed file server content is harder.

Greenfield Microsoft 365 deployments. Customers standing up M365 fresh with no legacy file server should usually go SharePoint from day one. The migration pain is zero when there's nothing to migrate.

Organisations fully committed to Microsoft 365. For businesses where the M365 stack is the strategic platform and the file server is legacy debt to eliminate, SharePoint is the right long-term destination. CentreStack can still help during the transition, but the end state is SharePoint.

CentreStack has built-in multi-tenancy, an MSP can operate a single CentreStack deployment that serves dozens of customer tenants, each with its own file servers, user base, and branding. Per-tenant provisioning, usage reporting, and billing are first-class in the product.

SharePoint's multi-tenant story is via Microsoft's delegated admin model across customer M365 tenancies. It works, and for an MSP fully committed to the Microsoft stack it's the natural pattern. But each customer needs its own M365 subscription, its own SharePoint migration, and its own user retraining programme.

For MSPs in Australia serving multiple mid-market customers with existing file servers, CentreStack's consolidated-deployment model is operationally simpler. CRS also distributes UFSConnect as a CentreStack-hosted option where the MSP doesn't want to self-host.

Choose SharePoint Online when:

• The customer is going full Microsoft 365 and deep Teams integration is a priority.
• Power Platform workflows against content are part of the strategy.
• The existing file server is going away entirely (greenfield or planned retirement).
• Office co-authoring is a daily use case for the team.

Choose Gladinet CentreStack when:

• The customer has a Windows file server that needs cloud access without migration.
• NTFS permissions are complex and remapping them to SharePoint would be a project.
• Line-of-business applications depend on drive-letter mapping.
• The customer wants data residency on their own infrastructure (on-prem or self-hosted cloud).
• You're an MSP serving multiple file-server customers and want operational consolidation.