Atlassian Confluence Reviews

I use Atlassian Confluence for documentation purposes. It is utilized for storing project data, sharing tickets through Jira to Confluence, and measuring documentation for every step of a project, much like a Wikipedia-style tag. Everything is noted in a step-by-step process on the Confluence pages.

Confluence helps save time and facilitates easy data sharing among team members. It allows us to create spaces for meeting notes that can be shared with other team members without reaching out individually.

The macros feature in Confluence is quite valuable. It allows the creation of tables, calendars, and the integration of hyperlinks with ease.

There is a significant difference between the data center version and the cloud version of Confluence. Providing the same features in both versions would be beneficial. 

Additionally, there is no functionality in Confluence to have a team title as a home page header and footer on each page export, which is something I've requested from Atlassian.

I have been working with Confluence for more than six years.

Stability depends on the setup. If you have good hardware and availability servers, Confluence is usually available continuously. The stability is primarily determined by the server and hardware configuration.

Scalability also depends on how you set up Confluence. It is easy to scale and expand the product.

If you take the premium support from Atlassian, they reach out within one hour. Otherwise, normal support takes one to two days.

Positive

The initial setup is very simple. Migrating from other tools to Confluence, or from cloud to the data center, is easy.

We didn't require any third-party consultants for the setup. We established this in-house.

Atlassian products, including Confluence, have yearly price increases of approximately five to twenty percent.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are a banking institution and use this solution to provide the key technical and functional documentation of the project that we share with our users. I'm the managing partner and we are customers of Atlassian.

The product is quite intuitive and user-friendly. It offers a lot of freedom when drafting directly online, and there are some very nice features to connect with JIRA, for instance. It's helpful that the solution enables documentation of user histories that you are following or tracking in JIRA and links the two. 

The performance could be improved, we sometimes run into difficulties creating tables. 

I've been using this solution for six years. 

The solution is very stable, we've never had a problem. 

The solution is very easy to scale, especially because it's easy to interface with other applications. In my project at the bank we have over 100 users; my client has thousands of users. 

I've never directly contacted Atlassian support because we have our internal IT department. If I have an issue, I raise an internal ticket via ServiceNow and the administrators of the bank take care of things. If necessary, they contact the vendor.

I'm not an administrator but I believe the initial setup is relatively simple. From a user perspective, you can very easily create a dashboard, quick links, and things like that.

This is a very easy cloud-based solution that permits collaborative drafting of documents. We can have several people editing documentation at the same time which simplifies things. It's a good solution for technical and functional documentation.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

There are some documents for users, some for developers, and some workspaces for projects, both in Jira and others for internal business processes within our company. It's not for customers, only for internal use.

The most valuable feature for me is the structure of documents. The page tree feature is more convenient for me.

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing.

I have been using this solution for around four years. 

It is a stable solution. We never faced any problem with stability.

The scalability is enough for our use cases. It covers all our needs. 

There was no problem with the setup process. 

When we started using Confluence, it was more convenient for us, but later, it became more expensive. Unfortunately, the data center version is expensive for us. So, it could be a bit cheaper.

In my opinion, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use the database for documentation and requirement gathering. So, we document those and create plans or backlogs.

I have actually not used the solution much. I have only used the solution to create pages, and I also used it to document certain requirements.

The interface is good. Usability-wise, the solution is not great. However, I can adjust, and I can work on it.

The solution's user experience needs to be improved. The solution is not very user-friendly. From my perspective, it should be more user-friendly.

In the future, the solution should be able to integrate with other tools. I think it is integrated only with Jira. But there are other tools with which it could also be integrated. We should be able to integrate this tool to get a trace of what information we are gathering. Maybe it is only possible for Jira because it is a Jira product.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for around a year.

The solution's stability is fine. It automatically saves the data. We don't lose any data even if we don't save it manually. So that way, if something happens to the system, it drops and shuts down, and the data is automatically saved. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

I didn't face any issues with the scalability. It was very good. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

I have not contacted customer support yet as I have not experienced any issues with the solution. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I don't have any experience with other products. I have used Azure DevOps, but I have not used too many products in this category other than Confluence.

The initial setup was straightforward and not too complex. I rate the setup a seven out of ten. I think the solution was previously deployed on-prem, but now, I think it is on the cloud. I also do not have an idea of how long it took to deploy Atlassian Confluence, as it was done by the backend team and not us.

I don't have an idea about pricing. But I can say that I think it's a good tool for requirement gathering, where you can create backlogs and store or document the data.

The solution may need a web build access code so that it can be used from anywhere. So, once you have access, you can access it from anywhere. And the scalability is also good. So, I can rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

It is linked with the documentation tools. SourceSafe is very quick and a more stable tool, especially for online multi-usage. Microsoft Project Service is much worse from when I was using it 10 years ago, but I don't have recent experience with it. With Atlassian Confluence, maybe the user interface is poorer, but the use of it is much more dimensional and stable.

I like the documentation. It's a central platform, and there are many things that I can do with it. I'm very pleased about it.

I can put my workspace and tasks under related documentation. I can put it heuristically on the portal, so I can see everything and the comments, and the document, the outputs, and the coding links. I can put down all the photos and see all of the portfolio in one shot, as a summary.

The user interface could be improved.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for more than 10 years.

My personal experience is related to the R&D process, R&D funding process issues, and R&D funding projects. I'm responsible for project management, program management, or department-related IT consultancy and also software development project teams. For the last 10 years, I have also been responsible for R&D project management and all of the process management of R&D centers, so government and funding organizations' process.

We are just analyzing many programs to enhance our project management tools, agile management and agile projects.

We have been using the JIRA platform recently, and tools for documentation and some custom internal tools that departments have just developed for us.

The solution is stable.

I don't know how scalable it is, but it's enough for 10 or 20 partners of companies to use it online.

In our company, especially with the development teams, we had more than 100 people using the solution.

I used Microsoft Project Server for almost two or three years. It's very hard to concentrate or consolidate the portfolios of resources in different projects. It's very hard to manage. There was too much administration that we had to do, so we stopped using that tool. 

I think Atlassian is better because it includes all the features that a PM or a project team needs.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. 

I would recommend this solution to others.

I use the solution in my company for documentation purposes. Most of our company's release notes are present on Atlassian Confluence for client review and for the processes we use in our organization. All the details about the new features of the upcoming releases and all the stuff related to the company policies, like employee engagement and everything else that should be documented, are present in Atlassian Confluence. I use Atlassian Confluence for document-controlling purposes.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from its document-controlling feature. In Atlassian Confluence, controlled documents cannot be edited by anyone else.

I would say that Atlassian Confluence's old versions consume too much memory, making it an area where optimization is required from an improvement perspective.

There are some issues with the templates in Atlassian Confluence. In our company, when some team members try to edit the templates in the product, they get stuck. There were complaints about the templates being less refined. When the components increase in the template, the product's users in our company get stuck, making it in an area where improvements are required.

It would be great if Atlassian Confluence could integrate with Microsoft Teams since it would allow our company to use just one tool instead of two.

The quality of the technical support needs improvement.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence since 2020. I am a user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution as eight out of ten due to the high memory consumption of the product, specifically its IaaS and not the SaaS version.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The tool is suitable for all types of companies. Many enterprise-level companies use Atlassian Confluence because they have lengthy processes that run for years. The aforementioned area prompts enterprises to choose Atlassian Confluence for their documentation.

Even though my company is able to open tickets with the tool's support team, we haven't gotten all of our issues resolved. I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

Neutral

With Atlassian Confluence, there are two types of setup processes available. My company uses the on-premises version of the product. My company also uses its own infrastructure to host Atlassian Confluence. Our company also uses the SaaS version of the product. In general, both versions of the product are being used for different projects. I think the SaaS version of the product does great in terms of memory and everything. The on-premises version of the product is a bit old but is more secure and preferred by our clients since they feel that their documents are safe in an on-premises setup.

In terms of the tool's ability to ensure better productivity of the team in our company, I would say that the old versions of Atlassian Confluence consume too much memory while also using Java libraries.

I don't think that the product ensures better communication between my team members.

It is secure to share documents through Atlassian Confluence. Documents shared via Atlassian Confluence cannot be edited or modified until and unless they are reviewed by the specific person for whom they are meant.

Though not to a large extent, my company has used Atlassian Confluence's integration capabilities. In our company, there were a few products for which we had to review the links with the clients and review the documentation, which was not much. I think Atlassian Confluence has much more to offer, but my company hasn't explored it that much.

If I consider large volumes of pages and space, I would say that the tool works fine with large virtual volumes of pages and spaces, but not all the time.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I use it as a knowledge base system for sharing knowledge and creating Kanban boards.

What I find the most valuable about Confluence is how easy it is to use. In addition, we have a lot of good clients and it can help us achieve a lot of things.

The area that needs improvement is the search capability. It should have generalized capabilities. The support should be better when it comes to analytics features.

I have been working with Atlassian Confluence for over five years.

The solution is quite stable. I give it an eight out of ten. 

The scalability of the solution is amazing. It supports a lot of pages and it's very helpful. I give it a nine out of ten. 

Approximately 300 people are using Atlassian Confluence within my business unit and there are around 1,000 users in the company. 

We haven't had many issues with the solution. Another team at our company handles the technical support, an IT expert who manages Confluence.

The initial setup is simple although it was not done by our team. We had a separate team do it for us.

When it comes to affordability, I give it an eight out of ten. It's reasonably priced since many people are using it.

Microsoft SharePoint is a bit fancier and can possibly achieve more complex things than Atlassian Confluence, but it's not easy to use. Confluence is simpler, and the integration with Jira is good.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. I would definitely recommend it.

There are two use cases for using Confluence wiki:

• Team notes
• Software documentation.

Wiki is a simple tool for developers to write and record team decisions explaining the product that they are creating. 

The best features are the following:

• Automated TOC
• Horizontal tabbing option
• Expanding drop down lists
• Easy image integration
• Access to the underlying HTML
• The list of macros in the drop down.

There is no concept of peer review or a draft mode - whatever you write is live. What typically happens is that the navigation bar becomes frighteningly large and difficult to read unless someone takes the reigns and curbs the knee jerk reaction to keep creating new branches in wiki's hierarchical tree.

No issues.

No issues.

Never tried to contact them. There is a lot of info on the web about Confluence wiki if you need help.

Wiki has been used for a long time at my company. Many people enjoy its zero learning-curve.

In-house.

Wiki is a good solution for non-tech writers. It is easy to learn and has a number of good features. The writing does not live beside the code, like GitHub Markdown does, nor does the wiki editor contain advanced editing features, like MindTouch, Oxygen, and other DITA editors. However, its simplicity encourages non-writers to document what they are doing.