Could you clarify differences from the Node Profile module?

Hi this Link will help u a lot
http://dev.shellmultimedia.com/node/42

It's largely a difference of simplicity. Bio.module does not require any other modules and has very little configuration necessary. I would suspect node profile might offer some extra features, but bio has some great views functionality coming down the pipe that I'm super excited about, so hang tight. :-)

I've been talking with Fago about how we can improve both modules and work together more. Hopefully there will be fewer and fewer differences (or one will build on the other) in the future.

Cheers,
-M

That was a great link, but I'm still unsure. I feel like I'll get down the road with one and wonder if the other is better. It seems like the main benefit of nodeprofile is that you can use multiple nodes for the user profile as opposed to one in bio. That said, nodeprofile requires more modules to make it work right. Bio only uses one content type and node, but with cck, cck field permissions, and a good use of views it seems like you could get all the info in one node. I mean why use a bunch of different nodes?

I'm curious for everyone's advice on my use case, and maybe it will help clarify the differences for everyone:

I'm setting up a pretty large intranet that will have various levels of node access and access to user data. For example, certain users should be able to see someone's email, others their email and office phone, others their email, office phone and home phone. I also plan to have two bio fields: one for short bios, and one for longer ones. The short bio will be shown at the top of their blog posts via blog.tpl.php or code or using views in a block, the long bio will be a "read more" from that persons short bio.

I also want to relate people to their organizations. I can do this with some type of cck user reference/cck node reference, or node as taxonomy where the "organization" node type is also a taxonomy term and we can relate content to that term that way users (as well as other content) can be tagged to that organization.

So, at this point, I could actually do all this with the regular profile module, user tags/taxonomy, and the other modules for the organization. The profile module allows me to protect content so only users in certain roles can see certain fields anyways right? So question 1: Do I really need users as nodes?
Answer: In this case yes, because I intend to relate users to organizations, but what about a contact who isn't a user of the site. People will still want their contact info. So if I use bio or node profile (I think this is right?) I could have a node type that is called "person" and use it for site users and their profiles, as well as to create contacts that aren't site users.

So now which do I use? Seems like 6 one way, half a dozen the other to me? Thoughts?