Jira Reviews

We primarily use the solution as an ALM, an application lifecycle management tool. 

I like the entire workflow customization, which we could set up for our usage.

There are some really great in-built reports.

The solution is stable and reliable.

The scalability is great.

In terms of the initial setup, the solution is easy to implement. 

We've had zero issues with the product. It's been great.

Even though I like the reporting part, we have some issues. I don't know whether there is a Jira problem or a test risk problem, however, sometimes, we face issues on fetching the reports. This is when in-between integration comes into the picture. There could be easier integration. It used to be easier in 2016.

We've been using the solution for more than three years now. It's been a while. 

The product is reliable in terms of performance. It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution can scale well. If a company needs to expand it can do so. It's not a problem.

We have 250 or more users using the solution. We might go up to 300. It's not likely we would pass 400 users. We might increase the usage a little bit.

We've never had issues with Jira and therefore have never reached out to technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be.

We used to use TFS.

The product is quite straightforward, especially since it is on the cloud. It makes it very easy to set everything up.

We have three people able to deploy and maintain the solution.

We did not use an integrator or consultant for the deployment of Jira. We handled the process ourselves. 

We pay for a yearly license. 

We primarily use the solution ourselves, as customers. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend the solution to others. It would be ideal if it offered better tool integration, however, other than that, we've never had issues. 

I use the solution for software project management and software lifecycles. Jira covers the entire process from requirement analysis to deployment. 

I prefer Azure DevOps and Microsoft Ecosystem to Jira. 

I consider Azure DevOps to be more user-friendly and to provide a better user experience. I feel Jira to be a bit difficult to work with. I specifically recall that i encountered difficulties with Jira when I wished to receive or generate a report. Azure DevOps offers a simpler and more user-friendly panel than Jira. Jira's reporting panel is not user-friendly and a bit on the difficult side. Azure DevOps also offers more options for generating queries and reports, especially when it comes to great dashboard visualization capabilities for the monitoring of one's project. This poses a big problem with Jira, as Azure DevOps does a better job of providing this feature. 

I find the dashboard to be Jira's most problematic feature. I do not like it and feel Jira is troublesome when it comes to visualizing the reports. These should be improved. 

Azure DevOps offers more simplified processes, maintenance and development than Jira. 

I used Jira for around one year, at which point I left my previous company and made use of it in the new one I joined, where I continued to do so. 

I find the solution to be stable, though a bit hard to use. 

We have not encountered difficulties with the scalability. 

We have had no issues with support. As with Azure DevOps, we take advantage of the open community and forums for resolving any issues which may arise. 

I prefer Azure DevOps and Microsoft Ecosystem to Jira.

I consider Azure DevOps to be more user friendly and to provide a better user experience. I feel Jira to be a bit difficult to work with. I specifically recall that i encountered difficulties with Jira when I wished to receive or generate a report. Azure DevOps offers a simpler and more user-friendly panel than Jira. Jira's reporting panel is not user-friendly and a bit on the difficult side. It also offers more options for generating queries and reports, especially when it comes to great dashboard visualization capabilities for the monitoring of one's project. This posed a big problem with Jira, as Azure DevOps does a better job of providing this feature.

I find the dashboard to be Jira's most problematic feature. I do not like it and feel Jira is problematic when it comes to visualizing the reports. These should be improved.

Azure DevOps offers a more simplified processes, maintenance and development than Jira.

As with Azure DevOps, we take advantage of the open community and forums for resolving any issues which may arise.

We make use of the solution free of charge. 

My recommendation, for sure, is that a person go with Azure DevOps. 

I rate Jira as a six out of ten. 

My people use ASS. I can define spins, I can define roadmaps, I can define components, I can do releases, I can define all kinds of issue types, heartbeats, some of those things. I'm using it for both business and software. In software we have Scrum and Kanban onboard, whereas for business we have the service and then there are those other options. We have multiple use cases. I'm the director of the company. 

I like almost everything about Jira. It defines how we track time and the way we define permissions. We can create multiple boards for the same product backlogs. 

I think that for users the solution is very intuitive but for project administrators, the way the product is defined is not very intuitive. There are too many ways to do the same thing. The setup of Jira sometimes becomes very, very cumbersome and difficult. It's not very easy for people on the project admins to really understand how to set up the product because of these features. If they were better organized and the documentation improved so that people would actually be able to figure out how to use Jira, that would be helpful. There are not many videos and it can be very challenging for anybody not familiar with the product. There are 50 users on the project I'm working on. 

I've been using this solution on and off for the last eight years. 

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We haven't really used technical support. 

The initial setup takes a bit of time because it has so many features that you should be aware of, but of course it provides a lot of out of the box features that you can use right away. You can set up in 10 minutes or 10 days, it's very rich. I was able to do the deployment myself with some extra help. 

For up to 10 users, the solution is free but above that there are licensing costs.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

We use Jira for software for product development, planning, some hardware product development, and for some solutions and services. Other teams in our company use Jira for scheduling daily work and daily tasks and try to organize or manage products and projects.

There are a lot of different plugins for Jira. Unfortunately, we did not test so many and the big pain point for us is the rigorous handling and the roadmap of Jira. We have a portfolio and structure plugin and we have our story map plugin in Jira. I am a scrum master and coach in my company. My colleagues aren't so educated on these plugins. So first we have to improve all knowledge with these plugins in Jira, to improve or efficiency in the roadmap and for these topics.

The performance is not so good sometimes. I know that fully depends on the implementation and the IT environment of Jira or the version of Jira installed. The performance is sometimes not so good. I would like to have a better response time from the Jira server. And it fully depends on the administration side of the Jira.

I have been using Jira for more than 10 years. 

It's a very stable system. 

My company has different locations in the world. We have maybe 1000 or 1500 people using this solution.

It is easy to scale and expand.

I am not a Jira administrator. So my feeling as a user of the Jira is that Jira is a very efficient, very good tool and a very stable tool from my perspective.

We haven't contacted tech support because the specialized team does it every time.

Everything is delegated to the team inside the company

We also used Mantis. I can't compare the two because Mantis was very different and that tool is very old. The function was very different in Jira. So when we switched from Mantis to Jira, it was a very big step. 

We have a specialized team that did the installation and does upgrades.

I prefer some different practices, like story mapping and inbox mapping or strategy planning. The story mapping is included in all Jira installation. It would be good to see some features for strategy and portfolio handling planning in Jira. I have used Aha! and this tool has a very good framework with a good toolset. The toolset for strategy planning, toolset for portfolio handling, toolset for product handling, and toolset for daily work handling is very good. I think the Aha! team did very good work. I know that this company is an American company and is a competitor for Jira and for some other tools. Unfortunately, I never heard about this tool before and don't know any other company using this tool, but the tool is very impressive. There are a lot of good features. It would be good to see something like that in Jira.

I would rate Jira a seven out of ten. I would give it a higher number if the features that I mentioned for the strategy planning would be included in the framework.

The primary use case is for software development teams to manage their work.

The most valuable features of this solution are workflow and reporting.

The team construct could be simplified. We use Jira with Tempo Planner, and Portfolio for Jira, and at times it is not always clear. With Portfolio, it's the same as Jira but with Tempo, it clashes. It's not a seamless transaction.

We would like to see integration between Tempo and Jira. For example, if I create a team in Tempo, I would like to be able to use it and re-use it Jira as well. 

In Tempo, if you create a team then you are able to link that to a project in Jira. I would like to have that same capability, where I can link to Portfolio for Jira. Specifically, if I create a team in Tempo then I want it available in Portfolio. When I am planning the work for my team, it would be easier to have that capability available.

I have been using Jira for approximately four years.

It's a stable solution and we have not had any issues.

Jira is scalable. 

We have more than 13,000 users and we have not experienced any issues with the performance or scalability. We are able to scale pretty well. 

I work with Jira on a daily basis, as well as offer support to users and guide them into making the best use of it.

We have a relationship with Atlassian. I have not personally had to contact technical support, but I do know that we have a technical account manager to whom we report any issues.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Jira is that it easy to use but you want to understand what your requirements are. You want to know what you want to use it for, and what you want to achieve by using it. 

With Jira, you get what you input, in terms of your data. For me, I get what I need out of it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The primary use is task management. It has performed okay. It is easy to configure and maintain. It's quite simple to track tasks, then link with other applications/solutions from Atlassian, like source codes.

• Visibility
• Avoids emails and exchanging information in an informal way. 

I would rather have a tool that we do everything on. Also, we have access to end user policies where we can configure them and give access to the correct person. We have tracking of who works on what and why over the history of a project.

Workflows, because we cannot employ a different approach depending on the speed of the project or customer. Whether it's research, engineering, or maintaining the process, we can cope with processes easily without adapting the tool, but adapting the tool to processes.

There are no fields to search or to filter by, mainly the ones which use a data around a date and time when something changes. So, you have to use some add-ons and create a lot effort to obtain information from the tool. Thus, you have to adapt to the lack of search that the tool does not offer.

So far, so good.

I don't see any problem with it.

In the past, I had training from the distributors and it was okay. 

The tool is very easy to use. What is important is that we don't have to wait so much for contracts or more hours to have support. This is something that we have, and it is good for this solution.

Everywhere that I worked, we started by using spreadsheets, then we moved to some free tool, and finally to JIRA.

As far as I know, the initial setup was very simple and straightforward.

Understand your own process: What you are looking for, the size of your company, what your budget is, and the larger plans for the future. There are tools that scale better than others and there are solutions that fit to both small and big teams. There are tools which scale better for larger companies. 

Most important criteria when evaluating a vendor: 

• We evaluate the company's strategy.
• If they bought an legacy solution to add to the portfolio or if they are developing from scratch.
• What are their plans for the future?
• What type of support do they have?
• What is their business model? 
• Do they have domestic experience or not?
• Are they focusing only on a few customers, and the size of those customers?
  

Workflow configuration (escalation, workflow chaining, conditions, validators, post-scripting, etc)

• Enforce role- and group-based permissions re: who can drag tickets, and when, on the agile boards.
• Instill true SLA-based reporting and escalation to keep work moving seamlessly through the process flow.

• Workflow management
• User permissions
• Native reporting capabilities in workflow
• Ticket status, etc

6 years

No

No

No

The forums and online documentation have been fine. I haven't needed to escalate beyond that.

The forums and online documentation have been fine. I haven't needed to escalate beyond that.

At my previous company they used Assembla. I switched them to JIRA which is more open in its project sharing as well as far more configurable.

JIRA has been very simple to use, no issues.

I've always done the implementations myself.

As an enabler of process and procedures, JIRA's ROI can be measured in that regard. Because we treat it like a tool and not an end unto itself, I've never measured it separately just for JIRA.

Including all plugins in my last job, ~$15,000 and $7,000 annually thereafter. That was very plugin-centric, however, due to the complexities and user interface solutions I implemented. Other deployments have been less expensive.

Bugzilla and other bug tracking tools were on the docket. We ultimately chose JIRA because of its UI polish and wide range of configuration options. When JIRA added Greenhopper, now JIRA Agile, that made the choice very simple going forward.

Read the online documentation, know what processes and procedures you wish to implement first, and keep it simple. Workflows can collapse under their own weight if they're overly complex for the sake of complexity, simply because "that's just the way things have always been done". Simplify simply simplify.

We are primarily a software development company. We work on some very specialized software for the government. So, we use Jira as our primary bug/issue tracker. We are also looking to put some add-ins in it to help with configuration management.

We also use it for configuration management and task assignment, but that's all within the bug tracker itself. What's good for us is that we are not doing all of that in three different applications. That's very useful. I'm sure larger businesses can find other uses and plugins for it, but right at the moment, Jira is fulfilling our needs.

We think Jira is great, it's been a real help as an issue tracker for us. We have had no problems with it. It just works; it's always worked. We never lose any data. So, we're happy to try to keep it going in the future.

We are a small business and we're up to our ankles in getting code out the door on a regular basis. We do not have a lot of time for investigating new things, but Jira has saved us a great deal of time. It has a nice user interface and we can do a lot of things with it.

They are not supporting in-house servers anymore and I think I've got until January to port this to something else. The issue is not that it is difficult to move Jira to another server, but we have a relatively large database on an SQL Server that Jira either uses or created and we do not want to lose that data. 

We are not a very large company so that is a problem. A lot of our business is on Azure and I would prefer to have an Azure solution for our software management. At the moment, I'm trying to figure out how to move Jira over to Azure on our servers. As a small company, we just don't have a lot of time to solve those kinds of problems. So we may end up moving to something else if it turns out to be more difficult than we can handle. 

Everybody has to make business decisions and obviously, right now, we're not in that sweet spot for them. But, moving onto the cloud has its advantages too. 

We are using Jira regularly now and have been for about a year. 

My impressions of Jira's stability are good. We are running the Jira application on a Windows Server 2019. We also have a large SQL database server running on Windows that Jira accesses. So, there's a Jira database running on the SQL Server and the Jira app and it's never gone down.

Jira is a scalable solution. We have not run into any issues with it. 

We have used a number of things from spreadsheets to in-house-built issue trackers. But Jira worked right out of the box.

For a small business, this quality of a product for the price is really nice. I think we're paying $78 a month or something like that right now.

I would definitely recommend it. Now I'm a 10-person development company with about 30 staff members. If you don't have a lot of IT support and you're doing everything yourself, Jira is a great product for you. It's not hard to install and it just works.