Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Jamboard vs Lucidspark comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Jamboard
Ranking in Visual Collaboration Platforms
6th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Lucidspark
Ranking in Visual Collaboration Platforms
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Visual Collaboration Platforms category, the mindshare of Jamboard is 1.0%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Lucidspark is 5.8%, down from 14.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Visual Collaboration Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Use Jamboard?
Share your opinion
DS
Jul 8, 2021
Facilitates a lot of the productivity of our working and brainstorming sessions
Some of the text layout and text formatting of these shapes is useful. Drawing slow diagrams is pretty useful. The user interface and intuitiveness are pretty good. Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. A little bit more automation, some grid snapping, and some layout options would make it a perfect ten. I like to use the templates. The virtual whiteboard for brainstorming high-level ideas and concepts is great. It's ideal for things like moving around sticky notes and having an infinite whiteboard. I like that you can double click on the whiteboard, on the canvas and it just creates a sticky note. That's very convenient. Formatting of stickies is also intuitive and easy. That's what stands out. I see Collaborator Colors on our team. You can add a color to each collaboration in the document. That's a very cool feature. Compared to in-person sessions, remote or virtual brainstorming sessions are good. It has its trade-offs. I think that sometimes it's easier to motivate and direct a group in person because you really don't know what people are doing sitting in their office at home. I still find it effective to do it virtually, you just have to be a little bit more attentive. This collaboration feature would be a good way to see who is doing what. Previously, I would have to click on a person's name and follow them around the board. I integrate Lucidspark with Atlassian, JIRA, and G Suite. These integrations are pretty important because I find adding the step of stashing these things in a shared drive is burdensome. It saves a lot of steps that are often overlooked. It puts those documents in the cloud where others can collaborate on them. I find it's an appropriate place to put them. I haven't yet used the features to tag and automatically group ideas but I know it exists. I'm not at that stage of research. It enables us to spend more time discussing and revising ideas and next steps, and less time organizing them. A lot of that analysis is done by the team in real-time. Having the ability to automate the organization would be something to look at but I don't know that it's so critical at this stage. It's built into our process. Lucidspark facilitates a lot of the productivity of our working and brainstorming sessions. It supports shared thinking. Brainstorming is very difficult to do virtually relying on one's imagination alone. Having Lucidspark allows us to hear the thinking of a blurb and we can put elements like branding elements and colors and build a mood board to help ideate. We can have key phrases on cards that are easier to duplicate so there's not so much creation. We use the integration with Slack in Lucidchart not with Spark.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is very reasonable. It is more expensive than some of the free options out there but much cheaper than Visio, and it works much better."
"I know that to get 10 seats for Spark is $2000 a year, which struck me as a little high."
"The licensing is a fair price. We mainly have single users. We chose not to do the team user because of the cost. We didn't see a need for that at this point. We have talked to Lucidchart and Lucidspark salesmen often about that."
"The pricing is in line with everything else out there, and you get what you pay for."
"One must pay extra if he wishes to have a higher level product."
"I was using the web version. I don't know what I signed up for, but I don't think I paid anything. It was just free."
"It would be better if I didn't use Lucidspark at all and just used Illustrator and Photoshop, but it doesn't make sense for my projects to do that. It would remove a tremendous amount of steps, but it would cost a tremendous amount of money."
"It is not cost-prohibitive. It is well worth it, but we are also a small team. We are definitely planning on having it as part of our onboarding for everyone, but I haven't looked at the pricing for an enterprise level or large set of employees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Visual Collaboration Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
14%
University
10%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
LucidChart vs LucidSpark for brainstorming sessions over Zoom
Hi @Krista Thompson ​ - Yes, LucidSpark is a much more nimble and, in some ways, user-friendly tool than LucidChart. LucidSpark is designed to do a better job managing multiple users participating ...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Miro, Figma, Lucid Software and others in Visual Collaboration Platforms. Updated: October 2024.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.