As far as I am aware, enabling or disabling files on demand affects both onedrive and any sharepoint sites synced to the user device.

We disable files on demand, as our users redirect known folders to onedrive, so to have these files available offline is essential.

If any sharepoint sites are synced however, this can lead to large sites fully populating the local disk & causing issues as a result.

To be able to enable files on demand for sharepoint sites, whilst disabling files on demand for onedrive data (known folders - desktop & documents) would be an ideal scenario for our company.

Currently our SharePoint links use the temporary domain name that we chose during the "free trial" period of Microsoft 365 for business. I have been told by Microsoft support that the only way to change this to our company's domain name is to open a new 365 account and migrate our email and all our data to that account. This doesn't make ANY sense to me and seems like a bug, since once we decided to purchase Microsoft 365 for business, we moved our company domain name over just fine for our Microsoft 365 email. The same should be true for OneDrive and SharePoint links. This just seems like a ridiculous oversight and makes Microsoft look really tacky.

In SharePoint Online document library, when you upload multiple documents of the same name it should display an option called "Replace All" instead of that it only displays "Replace" option, and it is really time consuming to click on "Replace" on every uploaded file, so imagine if you upload more than 200+ file in the document library to replace them with existing file with the same name, then you have to click one by one on each and every file to "Replace". This is a known functionality i wonder how it is not available in Modern experience document library whereas same is available in Classic SharePoint.

Microsoft stated that a PowerShell script would be available to enable SharePoint 2013 workflows for new SharePoint Online tenants after November 2020. I have not been successful in obtaining this script through any service request mechanism. Could you please make this available. We have customers in Life Sciences (medical device design and development) who using SharePoint based systems that are certified compliant to international standards. Because of the certification process, re-engineering their platforms to use alternate workflow technologies cannot be done quickly. Creating new tenancies for new customers is therefore not an option. This is an urgent business limiting issue. Please help.

We need to be able to "Grant Sharing" to users just as we do other functions. Sharing Options should include:
1) Sharing with Tenant Users (View or Edit)
2) Sharing External (View or Edit)

in addition, the system should not even offer the user the option to Share with Edit unless they also have the rights.

We should also have the ability to Allow/Disallow Sharing at the list/library level.

All external shares should have the ability to set expiration dates (even if its only 1 month, or no expiration).

The current model leaves with the option to block someone from sharing or grant them sharing. Even with great training people are making mistakes - especially on the current sharing screens that default to EDIT rights on sharing.

The ability to control access from unmanaged devices using the SharePoint Access Control functionality with Conditional Access is very useful.

However, the limitation that individual sites can only have more restrictive controls than the organisation level setting (as described in https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/control-access-from-unmanaged-devices#block-or-limit-access-to-a-specific-sharepoint-site-or-onedrive) is frustrating.

It would be great if the organisation level setting could be set to restrict access from unmanaged devices but then defined sites that specifically need to be less restricted could be 'opened up' by reducing the restrictions.

We can do this at a user-level using Conditional Access exclusions but there's no way to apply an exclusion at a Site (or Site Collection) level (that I can see!).