Atlassian Confluence Reviews

We use Atlassian Confluence for creating different pages, and projects on it.

The most valuable feature of Atlassian Confluence it's very easy to use and there are different options. 

We have to use other applications that make Atlassian Confluence more customized for what you want. They should improve by adding the ability to make more customizations.

In a future release, they could add easy reporting. For example, EZPi can be deployed easily into 

I have used Atlassian Confluence within the last 12 months.

Atlassian Confluence is stable.

We have not had a problem scaling up Atlassian Confluence.

We have approximately 300 people using the solution in my company. We all use it on a daily basis.

I have not used the support from Atlassian Confluence. It is an easy tool to use. You do not need a lot of help, but you do need some training.

The setup of Atlassian Confluence can be difficult and other times easy because if you want to implement something, you need to have your process figured out. You have to understand exactly for what purpose you want to use something. Once you understand that, you have to know how you're going to use it. Not only immediately, but also in the future. Once you have this map, then you will be able to use a tool properly. Otherwise, you will be doing trial and error for a while.

If you want to get Atlassian Confluence up and running, the time is depending on whether you want something simple or customized. However, it can be done within a week and have everything running.

There is a license needed to use Atlassian Confluence.

We are using Atlassian Confluence because we mainly implement Atlassian tools for customers. It is helpful for us to use them to understand our customers' needs if there is a problem.

It is important to know what the client wants to use this solution for. After knowing what they want to use it for I would advise them to use it or not.

I rate Atlassian Confluence a ten out of ten.

I use Confluence to organize my data. In the case of Confluence, I use it to handle various transactions in the bank. We have multiple channels in the bank. The bank I work for is one of the largest in Brazil.

I manage five different channels in the bank. I receive messages, put them in a pipeline, and then process the data in various ways. After that, I distribute the processed data through different channels. I also have other tasks related to client management.

For example, I have to connect my legacy systems with new solutions, and Confluence helps me with that. I use different connectors to transfer data from legacy systems to new core solutions.

For me, the most valuable feature is its high performance. It's crucial for us in the bank, as we handle a massive number of transactions every day. It's very efficient and saves a lot of time.

Additionally, the ease of use and the availability of different connectors are important. They help me connect with various databases and facilitate integrations with different solutions.

I have a couple of different pipelines that I work with. However, I'd like to see them displayed differently on the same dashboard. So, I would like to have a unified dashboard to view the different pipelines.

In my case, the governance aspect is the most important. It doesn't work well with a huge company, and it's not as effective as it could be for software developers.

Moreover, there is an area of improvement in the governance functionality within Confluence, especially for large companies like ours, to have a more sophisticated governance solution associated with Confluence.

I have been using it for six months. I am using both Confluence SaaS solutions. I have access to various versions of the software.

It is very stable solution. 

I would rate the scalability high. 

The customer service and support team was not so good. In Brazil, the technical support for Confluence is not very good because the team is small. We are still trying to improve, but there are a lot of open permissions on the internet. However, Confluence is a very important tool and has good features. So, it's important to have better support because it can make it easier for users to work with Confluence. Currently, it's not as close as other brands, which makes it hard to propose new ideas or get prompt assistance. There are a lot of opportunities to make it more user-friendly.

The initial setup was complex.

In my opinion, it's worth the investment. I saw an ROI in a short time.

The pricing is good. In my opinion, there are no better alternatives.

I would definitely recommend using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I use Confluence for project documentation and team collaboration.

With Confluence, everything is in one place, so it's easy to find documentation. This means we don't need to use other tools, like SharePoint.

Confluence's best features are very easy content writing and publishing. It also has good integration with other Atlassian products, Jira in particular.

Some elements of the user interface could be more user-friendly, including embedding diagrams. In the next release, I'd like to see better integration with diagramming tools or software architecture.

I've been using Confluence for a few years.

Confluence is stable and dependable.

Confluence's scalability is good and can handle many parallel users.

Atlassian's technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup was easy and happened in the background.

We used an Atlassian support company for the initial deployment.

Confluence charges an extra fee for analytics.

I would recommend Confluence to other users because it's easy to use and integrates well with other documentation tools. I would give Confluence a rating of 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.

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.

The most valuable features are the collaboration and sharing of information.
The ability to crowdsource the gathering of information and have anyone edit and correct it instantly.

Quite simply, information is king. We have been able to share effectively and reduce our reliance on the usual Word docs and shared drives.

The WYSIWYG editor is great, but there are some problems with formatting. Tables and fonts are not always rendered correctly, especially when CCS is used to customize them. It is useful to understand Wiki Markup language to get around these problems.

The use of CSS can be a challenge, making customization difficult for new starters who have little experience of creating/editing CSS.

We have used this solution since the very early versions created in 2003 (or thereabouts).

There have been no major stability issues. There have been a few outages, but nothing which suggests that the product/version is inherently unstable.

I’m not aware of any scalability issues, but then I’m a “user” of the service and I no longer run an instance.

My questions have always been around the use of the product. It’s more effective to ask the community via the on-line forum, or to reach out via other websites. In most cases, a general search for answers via Google tends to provide answers.

I’ve played with MediaWiki, but not in detail and therefore I can’t compare it with Confluence.

I installed version 4 from scratch. That was very straightforward. I connected it to Postgres (PostgreSQL), and that was trouble free and straightforward.

I haven't had the need to install more recent versions or manage installations that service a large number of concurrent users.

This is a good product which beds itself into the enterprise very quickly. It soon becomes indispensable. It is worth getting a limited, license-free version first.

We provide this solution to customers and also use it in our company. It's often used as an intranet and then for collaboration or communication. It enables you to have project spaces or team internal spaces and different types of documentation. We are platinum partners with Atlassian and I'm a principal consultant. 

I think the structuring of information into spaces and the search functionality are really powerful features. The solution is user-friendly and anyone can comment or write documentation related to a customer's project. The main value is that Confluence makes communication easier. It has a very unique feature in that it has a marketplace of apps which means you can extend Confluence by installing apps into it and make it work differently.

I'd like to see easier integration.

I've been using this solution for 10 years. 

The stability is very good. 

The solution is scalable, we have around 600 users. We'll probably expand usage to new areas. 

Customer support has deteriorated because the company has grown so much. They can't provide the same level of service. We provide consultancy services so it works to our benefit.

Positive

I've also used Sharepoint and in comparing the two, Confluence makes communication much easier. SharePoint is more difficult to use and a complex solution.

The initial setup requires some planning. To get Confluence up and running took a day but it took close to a year before everyone felt comfortable with the solution. Following the initial setup, it required user management and security settings. And then build the data structure or space structure and install plugins. Following that there is a training process for users. We deployed internally because we have experience providing that type of consultancy to other companies. Half of the companies we deploy to use some external help and half do it by themselves. It takes longer if you do it without assistance.

Maintenance requires less than one man month per year because you don't have to install updates. But still there's some maintenance, cleaning up data and fixing the permits and things like that.

The ROI is both in terms of time as well as financial. 

Confluence used to be really affordable but they've been increasing their prices. It's not super expensive but more expensive than it used to be. We pay an annual licensing fee which includes some essential plugins. 

Spend some time planning the structure and how you're going to use Confluence and provide some initial training. It makes the deployment easier.

I rate this solution nine out of 10.