Atlassian Confluence Reviews

We are using a lot of Confluence. While we are gathering the requirements from the business for the development, Confluence is used. We are creating project charters there. It covers all the functional requirements including knowledge sharing sessions. Basically, when somebody's leaving or somebody is being hired, everything related to that goes on Confluence. This also includes information, for example, about annual leave information, et cetera. If a person is hired and we need to prepare a KT plan for that. So we prepare a page in Confluence.

We like that it is a complete knowledge base where anyone can go and search for various types of information. Different departments are using it. If I want to search for any information, instead of pulling it from files, we have just added everything on Confluence, which makes it easily searchable.

It's easy to use and you can create all types of pages. 

There are lots of functionalities. You can see statues, who is signed in or not, et cetera. 

When we import the data in Confluence from Word or any other document, the formatting is not correct. When we export the data, more or less, it is fine. Let's say from Confluence to Word or Confluence to PDF, it's okay. Otherwise, we face formatting issues.  

The solution would offer more importing features. 

We have used the solution for 15 years or so.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is great. If your workload grows, it can easily match it. 

We have 700 to 800 people using the solution right now in our organization. HR, production managers, and more are typically on the solution. Pretty much everyone uses it. 

I haven't had any interactions with technical support. I can't speak to how they are in terms of responsiveness.

My understanding is that the pricing is competitive. I'm not directly involved in the pricing and how it was done. That said, the fact that we have been using it for the last 15 years makes me assume it would be fine for our pocket and reasonably priced. I'd rate the pricing at a three out of five in terms of value for money.

Confluence basically is not a management software. It is just a knowledge base. You can search for whatever is there. You cannot manage a project using Confluence. For that, you would need Jira, not Confluence. 

I would recommend the product. Currently, most companies are using Word documents for creating all requirements. Probably they'll be putting those in, either on SharePoint or somewhere. However, these need to be preserved for the future. This solution helps with that.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We were developing an eCommerce platform and wanted to capture all of the metrics that were coming across. We chose Confluent, which is a ready-to-use solution. The use case was to track all of the traffic that was coming from across the globe, and create metrics out of it.

We used the solution for monitoring and alerting. It was purely for internal processes so we could monitor the status of services and see if something was happening, like an order not getting through, or the customer dropping, or a problem within the system itself. The ability to capture those kind of metrics helped the business.

The solution does have tons of features, but sometimes we don't want every feature to be there, we just want a basic solution. They don't offer the option to customize the package, so you get everything with the one bundle price. Maybe we're only using 10% of it, but we have to pay for everything. There needs to be a flexible pricing model, where we can pick and choose services and customize our pricing model.

I used this solution for about a year as an integrator for a previous program.

Overall, we had a good experience with this solution. I'm pretty satisfied because we were able to quickly achieve what we wanted to do.

The scalability of the solution is pretty good. I would rate the scalability as a seven or eight out of nine. 

The solution has good support.

We used open source Kafka or other solutions where you can deploy the open source version in your infrastructure and you don't have to pay anything, but you have to manage the solution by yourself.

The initial setup was straightforward and quick. 

We used CodeFish for deployment. 

The pricing depends on traffic, like how much input and output is happening and how many messages you're handling. For example, you have a bundle package that has a limit. If you go beyond that, there's a different price attached to it, but if you are within that limit, it's a fixed price.

Overall, the solution helped us to see where we were going wrong and where we were doing good, and that helped us to make proper decisions.

Confluent is a very good product, but only if you are using it to the fullest. If you want to use all the features offered by Confluent, there's no competitor for that, but if you're only looking for basic capabilities, then I wouldn't suggest Confluent. MSK has less capability as compared to Confluent, but since we were not using all of the capabilities, MSK is cheaper for me because I just want the basic features.

Confluent is a classic product. There's no doubt that they're leading the market and their offerings are excellent. I would rate them as a nine out of ten.

In multiple organizations, we have been using Atlassian Confluence as a knowledge base, and for development. Our developers use it alongside Jira.

What I like the most is the Wiki software that comes with Atlassian Confluence.

The interface is good and it's pretty easy to use. Most developers have some experience with Jira, which makes it pretty easy for people to pick up. We don't usually need to provide them a string.

They can easily take on some of the features from Slack. 

They could try and copy Slack more and bring them into the market a bit quicker. That would be helpful for them.

I would like to see integration with Slack.

There could be improvements with the app ecosystem. For example, if we look at Teams, there is now an entire ecosystem. With Teams, you can essentially install any apps and do any integrations. Third-party, similar to Microsoft.

It's more about integrations with third parties. That is also something that could be better.

I think it can be more competitive, considering the competition they are now going to get from Slack and Teams. For example, if you look at Microsoft Teams, Microsoft is providing 365 for free with Slack.

I have been using this solution for approximately seven years.

We have not had any issues.

We have 1100 users.

The customer support is pretty good. If you reach out to them, they are very helpful.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward, I have never had any issues.

When you purchase this solution you get some support.

Jira and Confluence go hand in hand. If it's for development, and if people have money to pay for one product only, they usually end up purchasing Jira, and not Confluence. 

But at the end of the day, it's an ecosystem. It really depends on how much you want to integrate and how much you want to dive into it.

It really depends on what ecosystem they invest in and what they're looking for.

You have to look at the use case and if you already have an application in your ecosystem which is fit for purpose, you have to ask yourself, why you want to go out and pay for another product?

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

• Quick and easy editing/creating of web based content
• Content is easy to format and easy to share: You simply type and save in a web browser
• Atlassian is an AWESOME company
• Confluence is the BEST wiki on the market

• It gives our company a single place to document run books, procedures, and knowledge base articles
• It's quick and easy to edit
• It seamlessly integrates with other tools we use, like JIRA

• Some versions have annoying bugs from time to time. Doesn't all software?
• The interface and functionality is different for users used to legacy content management systems like SharePoint. However, spending a few minutes with Confluence and its intuitive interface will have them creating content quickly.

I also manage a SharePoint team, so I'm not biased. It’s just my opinion based on what I see.

I've used and administered Confluence for the past three years, over five versions. I am about to upgrade to the sixth version.

With earlier versions, such as 5.4.4, we did have stability issues. After upgrading, we've been stable and fast.

Stability issues were caused by an increased user load, i.e., scalability.

Technical support gets a rating of 5/5. We pay for Premier support. It covers ALL Atlassian products. If these products are in any way important to your company, it's worth the cost.

We were using TWiki. We needed an enterprise ready tool instead of freeware.

The setup was straightforward and perfectly documented. Atlassian gives you a step-by-step guide. You would expect nothing less from a documentation platform.

Atlassian is dirt cheap when it comes to enterprise software. I would suggest limiting the number of plugins (a.k.a., add-ons), as they are an extra cost and many times you're dealing with third-party vendors.

At the very least, use the ones that say "Atlassian Verified" and "Supported".

We did not evaluate anything else that I know of.

• Hire someone with experience using Atlassian tools, if possible
• Don't implement organically
• Have a PLAN for how you want your information structured

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 are able to add 3^rd party plugins and overall collaborative abilities. Keep in mind that DocOps moves the technical content industry from heavy duty doc apps to a crowdsourced approach which requires extensive collaboration. The plugins enabled basic doc properties such as version control from K15t.

DocOps is a leading edge approach to technical content. We could not have done this without Confluence. Other companies are looking to duplicate.

The search ability (using Lucene) is less than optimal and has known bugs that are slow in getting addressed. Search is key on any content platform.

We have had Confluence used casually inside R&D for several years, but then built DocOps using confluence at its core about 18 months ago. This rating is based on that instance (which is hosted at Contegix).

We use the latest release of Confluence.

No issues with deployment.

Yes, but because we stressed it with an integration to Lingotek which enables real-time cloud translation and a few plugins.

We are constantly watching scalability and are a bit worried but believe the costs of the new Data Center version cost prohibitive.

They seem to struggle a bit. We were having some concerns with CPU usage and heap memory. Support seemed to struggle with solving. I also felt like I really had to purchase support for $35k to get the level I really needed.

They seem to struggle a bit. We were having some concerns with CPU usage and heap memory. Support seemed to struggle with solving. I also felt like I really had to purchase support for $35k to get the level I really needed.

No. This was a different direction from a documentation systems to confluence. Not a switch of wiki products.

We had help from hired services help such as K16T and others. I also think our installation was much more complex than most from what I am told.

This is a complex answer given we created an industry leading platform and way of using confluence unlike any other user.

Due to our experience using it internally and based on a review of a few free wiki’s, we decided to go with Confluence so as to have only 1 product at CA.

Spend time figuring out the best way to maintain. Hosted vs On Premise. Also, you may need to develop new skills to install and manage the plugins.

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.