Jira Reviews

We had a regulatory requirement through our legislature to collect motor or voter information for residents of California. So, if you basically wanted to sign up to vote, you could do so at a department of motor vehicles. The Jira instance was used for what we call the new motor voter, which is the online premise to register to vote when you conducted a DMV transaction, such as vehicle registration, driver's license, renewal, etc.

We had its latest version. It is online. In the cloud, we set up an account for the department, and then add users as needed. It is a government cloud.

It documented our business requirements.

It was easy to use. The consultants that we had on board were familiar with it. So, obviously, having a community that had used it before or was familiar with it was a positive thing.

If I'm comparing it to ALM Octane, the documentation is not as robust as ALM Octane's documentation. So, they can improve on the documentation side.

Another enhancement could be in the area of interfacing with other products or connectivity. It could have better integration with other tools.

I have been using it since 2017. It has been about five years.

Its stability is good. There are no issues with the performance.

Its scalability is fine. At the peak, we had about 15 users, and towards the end, we had five users.

Our usage was not extensive. We used it only for one project, which was the motor voter project. We don't have any plans to increase the usage. We have stopped paying the subscription fee from the last month because we migrated everything over to ALM Octane for our business requirements.

We didn't need to call them at all.

We were using IBM DOORS Next Generation for business requirements. It was on-premises, and we weren't able to make it available through a URL to the external consultant or workforce. That's why we basically went with Jira. IBM DOORS Next Generation wasn't flexible enough to accommodate all of our remote workforce.

It was straightforward and easy. You basically create an account for your department, and then you onboard your users. There is a subscription fee per user for each month through Confluence. 

It took us a week to get it up and running. It involved reading, studying it, figuring it out, and then doing it. It was pretty simple to set up data and add users. So, we onboarded it within a week.

The challenge for us while setting it up was that we had to put it on a credit card, which is not a good thing for the government. Typically, the government likes to pay through a purchase order or procurement process, but because it was a monthly subscription fee, it had to be on a credit card. We had to use an executive card in order for us to pay the bill every month, which was really kind of a pain because our accounting office always had to make sure and check the number of users. They would ask if I had 15 users this month. I am the administrator of the application, so, of course, I know how many users are there. I can see how many users are there and how many are using it and remove them if they don't. I think the state just needs to modify its procurement process because I think ours is pretty old school. I don't think that Atlassian needs to adapt to ours, but that was the only challenge we had in setting it up and configuring.

We had an in-house as well as a procured consultant, but he was through the state, not directly with Jira or Confluence.

The ballpark figure is about $100 a month.

It is easy to use and easy to onboard. It has got a good foundation of offerings for the business requirements if you're working on an agile project or user stories.

I would rate Jira a seven out of 10.

I personally use Jira for project management and agile software development. I'm an information technology program manager and we are customers of Jira. 

We're a software development company and Jira is an essential element of our daily work. We wouldn't be able to function without it. 

Jira is a very comprehensive and flexible product. It's easy to set up, easy to learn, and is very user-friendly. If you're using the cloud version from Atlassian, there are no issues with maintenance or performance. I especially like the advanced planning features in the premium version and there are plenty of apps available if any functionality is missing.

The only complaint I have about Jira is that there is no field-level permission for the issues in the Jira cloud version. You can get an app for the server version, but the cloud version doesn't allow that type of functionality. For example, I write a user story that goes to the customer for approval. Once approved, I would want to be able to lock the description for that user story so it can't be changed, but I'm unable to do that. I can lock the whole story but not the description alone. It creates a problem because when I need to add the story to a sprint, I need to change the sprint number field. It can't be done because the whole issue is locked or lacks the properties to be edited.  

The other thing missing is a straight connection to the pipelines and the source control. I think it should be integrated with GitHub and other products that developers use. It's the lack of integration that's the main reason we are considering moving to Azure DevOps.

I've been using this solution for several years. 

I haven't had a single issue with Jira.

Jira is easily scalable to any level you want. Our company has 60 to 70 users working on multiple projects and we have a second installation specifically for one of our customers which has around 25 users. The users in our company have traditional roles; developers, business analysts, QA engineers, project managers and customers. We're using it constantly. 

Jira has a two-tier pricing system; a basic level and a premium level, which I think could be broken down a little more, but the pricing and billing are reasonable. You can add or remove users and they bill you dynamically month to month based on the number of users. It would be nice to have tiered pricing based on user numbers because, for large companies with hundreds of users, it's going to become expensive really quickly. It's acceptable for us and we have what we need.

We are considering switching to DevOps and are currently carrying out an evaluation. The main reason is that our offshore team uses DevOps for everything. We started with Jira so they had to use it for us, but we're hearing that DevOps is better integrated with source control and releases, so it's something we're considering now. 

I've had a look at the pricing of DevOps and it's really strange. Basic pricing is $6 per user per month or if you want to include test plans it jumps to $52 per user per month, which is an astronomical jump. I'm not sure whether it's $52 for every single user on the system. Jira charges $7 per user, per month for the basic version or $14 per user, per month for the premium one.

The product is very useful. As a program manager, I recommend it wholeheartedly. The cloud version is easy to set up, and there's no maintenance required. I haven't incurred any issues with performance or updates being applied incorrectly or any bugs. 

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

We are using it for project management.

It helps everyone to be on the same page.

Its integration with Bitbucket, Confluence, and other related products that Atlassian owns is most valuable.

If CI/CD is integrated with it, it would be better. I've used Azure DevOps before, and it's nice to have everything, such as CI/CD Repos and other things, integrated. Jira has fewer integrations. Azure DevOps has an easier interface, and it has got everything in one spot. I don't have to jump around in different applications.

It should have more Trello-like features. There are some things you can do in Trello, but you can't do them in Jira, which doesn't make any sense because Jira bought Trello.

It looks pretty solid.

It looks scalable. I haven't seen any issues.

It is being used extensively at the moment in our organization. Currently, IT departments are using it.

I have not interacted with them.

I wasn't around during the setup.

It has a lot going on. They own Bamboo, but right now, we're using Jenkins. 

I have used Azure DevOps at another company. I would advise going for Azure DevOps because it has everything. You've got your DevOps, and you have your Repos. Everything is integrated.

I would rate Jira a six out of 10.

We use Agile Practices, so we track all our projects in Jira. When the project starts, we start putting all the user stories there. If any user story has any down the line task or user career task, we attach those Jira stories to our Confluence pages as well. So we maintain Confluence pages as well as Jira together as a story. The requirement and the Jira story are linked together.

Managing and keeping track of projects is a little bit difficult in the IT world. Jira provides the exact picture of where a project stands. It also provides automation or DevOps technologies. This brings our company together, and whenever we have to see a project's exact state, we can use Jira.

It's a Scrum tool, so it's very easy to use. That's what I like about it.

You can very quickly create a new project, add stories, and then make them into a sprint. It's very user-friendly.

Jira covers everything for project management and life cycle related items. It's a fine tool to work with.

I have not seen any issues with stability or scalability.

Sometimes, it gets a little bit difficult to find the exact issues for people, but the search works fine in general.

The Classic UI is a little bit messy. UX experience is also a little bit messy and is not according to the expectation of a tech user.

If I click on an issue, that issue opens on the side. It shouldn't be like that; either it should open as a pop-up so that I can see where it is opening or it should open somewhere else, maybe as a pop-up or a new page. The view on the side is a bit of a hurdle. The UX needs to be improved.

Good use of Kanban technology should be there. Right now, it is mixed with Scrum technology, but that's not very necessary.

I've worked with Jira for more than five years. Our company has been using JIRA for a long time.

It is stable; I've never seen it down.

The scalability is also good. We are a company of more than 800 people, and I haven't seen any scalability problems as of yet.

Most of the users are developers, and at least 700 users must be using Jira in our system.

I think the starter pack of three users, up to five users, is free. So you can try it out.

In terms of project management and repository management for the code, I find Jira to be the best. So on a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at nine.

We have different software projects. I primarily use Jira to define and plan projects for agile-based project management. We use different aspects. We have scrum-based management for some projects and different systems for others.

The agile framework works well, and I pretty much live by that. Everything, such as sprint management, is laid out.

It is easy to use and implement. It provides me with pretty much everything that I need to be able to do day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy.

It is a great centralized tool for everything. You can use it for your local team management to communicate with your developers. You can also use it for your management team and for communicating with subcontractors to keep track of work products, work logs, and perform at the minute status.

For how I identify tasks and break down use cases, I wish there was the ability to drill down Stories multiple levels deep. You have Epics, Stories, Tasks and Sub-tasks. Each of which can go one level deep. It would be nice to be able to be able to define Stories multiple levels deep in order to break down super complex use-cases. That is my only pet peeve. Other than that, they've been improving year to year, and each new version seems to have increased levels of improvement.

I use another product that synchronizes well with Jira called Worklog Assistant, by Sohail Somani, which runs separately to Jira. It is a great product that allows you easily keep track of work performed and generate all respective Jira worklogs at the press of a button. I've been using it for years, and it just makes it very easy for me to keep track of what I am doing with an accurate time tracking mechanism. I think this would be a nice tool to integrated with Atlassian Jira.

I've been using it since 2008.

It is pretty stable. They've improved things over the years. Back in 2008, when we were starting to use it, different issues used to come up from time to time. It was still relatively stable. Now, I rarely run into a problem for which I can say that it is a problem with the tool, as opposed to user error.

It is pretty scalable. I was actually kind of surprised at how much data I can put in. It doesn't slow the tool down. It is quite scalable, and it worked well for the projects that we've done.

We're a small company. I can't compare myself to IBM or Raytheon. I can talk for a small company with up to 45 employees with X number of projects. Because of COVID, we've had to pare down, and currently, we have two users who are using it. I myself use it on a regular basis. Four or five years ago, we had subcontractors who used it with us. At that time, we had seven or eight users, including clients and subcontractors.

It is being extensively used at the moment. The only increase in usage would be to include other individuals on it.

We used their support early on, and they were helpful. At that time, we were using the enterprise product, which was a purchased product. So, as a paying customer, you got straight-up support. They were good. There were some bugs and issues early on that were difficult to get through, but they worked them out. Now, we have fewer people, so we use the one to 10 person option, and I haven't had any reason to call support. I haven't had a need to use their support in years.

They self-use their product for defect management. You can always go to their website and find what's going on. They have forums, et cetera.

In the previous company that I've worked for, I've used Bugzilla for defect management. Task management was in-house, but I don't remember the tool that we used to do task management. For building up sprints, etc, we used a Wiki-based system. It probably was TWiki at the time. We had set up our own Wiki-based environments for doing management, et cetera. We also had Excel spreadsheets. I didn't know about Jira back then in the previous company.

We did some research when I started with this company, and we chose to use Atlassian. It wasn't just, "Oh, the company was using it." It was one of the things that I was part of instituting. We did what we call Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) to determine what was the best bang for the buck and what covered our needs, and then it evolved from there. After I started using Jira in this company, a lot of things were easy to do.

Its setup is semi intuitive. There are certain things for which you need to look at the instructions. It also depends on how complex your environment settings are.

Initially, back in 2008, it was a little bit more difficult, but they've improved the installation process. If you have a very basic setup, you can just pretty much install it right out of the box with maybe one or two changes. There're certain things for which you need to have some IT knowledge of your environment in order to be able to set it up. Other than that, they have really automated it pretty well. Jira is one of their keystone products.

Its initial deployment took hours or maybe days because there were things that I needed to understand, but they've improved it a great deal. You can pretty much be up and running within an hour, but it also depends on your environment.

Its implementation was an in-house job.

In terms of maintenance, I take care of its maintenance. Its maintenance is minimum, and only one person is required. You can easily run backups. We use Microsoft SQL Server for backend data management, and we automate the backups. We do daily backups, etc. If anything goes wrong with the tool we have, we can just rebuild it from scratch, and we will be fine because our data is there.

They also have built-in backup utilities that you can use. There is an XML-based one, which I do like to use from time to time just as an alternate. So, you do have different options.

We've seen a return on investment when it comes to Jira.

For very small companies, if you have less than 10 individuals, it is $10 a year for each of the products. When we were a part of the enterprise and had more than 10 people using it, or before they came up with this solution for small companies, it was $2,500 a year for the license for Jira and Confluence, and I believe something like $600 a year to perpetuate the license. I can't remember if it was $600 or $2,500 annually. It was for up to 25 people at the time, and this was in the early 2000s and mid 2000s.

There are a number of add-on products that you can sync with Atlassian Jira. Confluence, FishEye, Crucible, and Bamboo are different Atlassian products, but then there are sub-products. They have what's called Atlassian marketplace, and you can buy products for certain needs. Tempo is a perfect product for doing time management and timesheets. It was also $10. So, you have a bunch of different types of add-on products that different individuals have built that work well with the tool, and they are quite stable.

One piece of advice, which they also give in their documentation, is to use your own database management system. They give you something that you can use. It is called HSQL or something like that, but you can use what your company can afford, such as MySQL or SQL Server, and manage that yourself. It will help you to do better data management and backup management. I would use the built-in backup management system as a backup, although I haven't had any problems at all in years. Just for a warm fuzzy, it is always good to have a backup system.

I would recommend looking into primary tools depending on your needs. If you're doing software, FishEye and Crucible are great products to utilize with it. You also have Confluence and Bamboo for continuous build management. Tempo, of course, is good for certain types of management.

I would rate Jira a nine out of 10.

We started using it in the eComm team for the website and all the digital projects. At the beginning was Jira for software development and the Confluence to move the communication away from our mailboxes. Now, we're also using it for marketing and campaign management. Confluence is now our single source of truth and, in general, we are using it in much more content-based projects.

In many ways: transparency, governance, new comers have a place where to find everything they need, email communications are kept to a miminum, project management is much easier. Also reporting to top management is improved, as there are a lot of nice features like roadmaps and dashboards that can be used for that.

The Kanban boards have been a very valuable feature because they can be either very simple for non-technical teams, but also highly detailed and data-driven for teams that are technical. We use them for both types of team.

Jira is also widely used, so whenever we start a collaboration with an agency/vendor we don't need to spend any time in deciding how are we going to communicate.

It is very flexible as well.

The next-generation software projects are very easy to use, but they lack a lot, and I found quite a few bugs. There are some really basic things that you still cannot do. For instance, setting a due date for a task that you create as mandatory is still not available. That's a bit of a blocker because people, especially those who are not technical, are not going to add anything if it's not mandatory. It's going to be difficult to teach them that they should do it anyway.

I'm trying to integrate these tools, and I'm trying to open them to different types of teams with different types of people. What I've found is that I read about a macro (App) or about a rule and think that it is what I need, but then find that things are not available for the cloud version. There are some features that are available only in the server version and not in the cloud version. I found a couple of add-ons that we were really interested in, and we couldn't use them because we're in the cloud version.

Sometimes when I tried to set up some macros/add-ons/apps, they didn't work well or were not flexible at all. For instance, you can add only one Excerpt macro to a specific page. And in the that area you cannot have a table, which means you cannot excerpt a table, only content. In general, if you follow the instructions they give you, it works, but when you try to adapt it to your actual needs, it often doesn't work anymore.

I've been using Jira for five years.

We started very small in just one team in the company, and then slowly we've started expanding it to other teams. Now, we are trying to roll it out to all the European digital teams.

We have had some big issues with customer support. Lately we have renewed our contract, and it has taken us two months to do so. There is no way to have a phone call with anybody. The chat is not there anymore. So, the only option is email, and these kinds of things are very difficult to communicate through email.

Two of us were contacting two or three different people from their costumer service till we found the one who was willing to go the extra mile and actually listen to what our issues were.

Try to be tidy from day one because it can get messy very easily. Jira is very flexible, and you can still move and migrate stuff around. However, the reality is that nobody is going to have the time later on to migrate and clean-up. I also recommend starting small because at the beginning it can be scary, especially for non-technical people. I'm thinking about the amount of notifications you'll get, for instance.

I would definitely start small and then slowly, while people are getting used to it, keep implementing it and adding features like roadmaps or dashboards. Try to have a plan or a scheme of how you want it to look before you actually start.

It's a great product and is widely used, so I would rate it at 8 on a scale from 1 to 10.

I work with a credit rating company in the US. As a scrum master and project manager, I have to make sure that all the impediments are removed for the team. I work with product owners to make sure that all initiatives requested by our stakeholders, who are mainly compliance and regulations people, are moving in a timely manner.

I use Jira to make sure that we are capturing all the work that is requested, and it is progressing in a timely manner. I am in charge of a squad called Core Operations Reporting. A squad is usually focused on one or two initiatives. The goal of our squad is to automate regulatory reports as much as possible. I talk to our stakeholders to ensure that any errors in credit ratings are dealt with in a timely manner. A lot of these requests are ad hoc, and we prioritize them in sprints in Jira. 

It was very easy to learn Jira. I can't explain how easy it was. The hardest part of my job is understanding the business and communicating with difficult stakeholders and difficult people on the squad who are resistant to change and agile methodology. The fact that Jira was so simple to understand was a huge boon in my book because I didn't have to waste time trying to learn the tool to get work done and move the squad along. It was very easy to understand.

As a scrum master, I run daily stand-ups, and they are run directly from Jira. During these stand-ups, to make sure that there are no impediments, I run through all of the open issues and action items that the team members have. The feature that I really love in Jira is called Issue Navigator. It allows me to customize how I want to show the user stories within Jira to my squad. 

I can use Jira Query Language (JQL) to write queries to see the stories that are there for the current sprint. I can also sort them by assignment. I am able to call each assignee and have them walk through the status of what they did yesterday, what do they plan to do for the next 24 hours, and if there are any blockers or impediments.

I also use Jira is for burndown charts. A burndown chart provides a visual depiction of how quickly the squad is closing out user stories. It gives us an indication of how efficiently the squad is performing. I also use the Active Sprints function and a feature called Planning Poker. Planning Poker is an add-on, and it allows me to work with my squad members to estimate the complexity of user stories. It allows me to estimate user stories in an unbiased way with my squad members. It is important that people are not piggybacking on other people's estimates, so when a business requests a functionality, I use Planning Poker to have people send me their estimates in an unbiased way. They cannot see what other people have estimated. This way, they have their own unbiased view on specific user-requested functionality and its worth. After that, we end up talking out like, "Why did you think it was a three? Why did the other person think it was a five?" So, it allows an unbiased way of estimating user stories.

One major issue that I, and even our business stakeholders, have noticed is related to Epic Link. In Issue Navigator view, Jira allows you to enter JQL, which is basically like SQL. You just enter a query, and it displays the stories that satisfy the query. There is a field called Epic Link, which is basically a high-level designation for a bunch of user stories with a common goal. Epic Link is typically of different colors. When Epic Link's background color is a dark color, it effectively becomes unreadable. I am looking at my screen right now, and there is an Epic Link called Click View User Request. The background is purple, and the text is black. It is almost impossible to read it unless you click on it or give it an extra minute of viewing. That's basically what needs improvement. I wish there was a way for us to change the text color of Epic Link in the Issue Navigator view.

I've been required to report on metrics, and I don't know if it is possible with Jira, but there needs to be an easier way to capture a few metrics. For a two-week sprint, we are required to report on a number of metrics such as committed, completed, added, and rolled over. There is a way to see the stories that have been added after the sprint has begun, but there is no easy way to aggregate this, which is a waste of time. I wish there was an easy way for Jira to explain to me what has been added after the sprint has been done. Currently, it is a bit difficult for me to tell.

In addition, when rolling over stories from one sprint to another, it is kind of difficult for me to find out how many story points were actually rolled over without going into Jira and doing an analysis. I wish Jira would somehow aggregate that information for me so I can easily report about it. There should be an automatic aggregation of how many story points were added after the sprint began and how many story points were rolled over to the subsequent sprint.

I also wish Jira had an indicator to tell you that you are approaching the limit for the story points that can be delivered during a sprint. Typically, there is an established capacity for each sprint. I take an average of all of the delivered story points from the past six sprints, and I use that number to estimate how many story points can the squad deliver. I wish there was an indicator in Jira that tells you that you are approaching the number of story points that can be delivered during the sprint. I don't think there is an indicator like that, but such an indicator will be very helpful because then I will be easily able to see that we are approaching the limit. I can then talk to the squad members and say, "Okay, we need to remove some story points from the sprint because we're reaching capacity."

My experience with Jira is pretty extensive. I pretty much use Jira every single day and multiple times a day. When I'm not using Jira, I'm using Confluence. I also use SharePoint.

It is 100% stable. Stability is also dependent on a lot of factors. Jira has been down once or twice, and people go crazy. In almost two and a half years that I've worked here, Jira was down only a handful of times, and I don't think that was Atlassian's fault. Atlassian is the company that is responsible for these tools. 

I am not really aware of things in terms of expansion. However, there are some add-ons or extensions for expanding the functionality of Jira. The Planning Poker tool seems to be an add-on. Similarly, there is also another extension or plugin called Structure that was previously going to be leveraged. We haven't moved forward with that because we're using more of a manual solution in the metrics reporting. There is another add-on called Dataplane Reports. So, scalability is definitely there, and there are definitely opportunities to scale horizontally and expand the functionally of Jira through plugins and add-ons. 

In our organization, we only have 5,000 employees, and probably 70% of the company is using Jira. which includes the business as well. The business is also learning how to use it, and they understand that it is a very powerful tool. I would say about 3,500 out of 5,000 people are using Jira.

I didn't have to contact Atlassian. We have an internal Jira support team that answers all our questions. I don't think they have contacted Jira support in a while.

Its initial setup was not done by me.

Its initial setup was done by Jira administrators.

I am not sure about the pricing, but I know its licensing is on a yearly basis.

The main advice would be to just use it as much as possible and try to learn the basics of JQL, which is Jira's proprietary language that allows you to tell Jira exactly what you want to see. It is pretty self-explanatory and not hard to use. There are so many different fields in Jira such as issue type, key, sprint, summary, Epic Link, reporter, assigning, status, story points, and components. You can add the required columns to the Issue Navigator view, and it will spit back exactly what you wanted to see.

You should also learn what kind of value it can add to the organization before just jumping in. Try to talk to senior management and figure it out. You should learn how to read the burndown charts to basically understand how efficiently the team is working. Every organization has an IT organization, and I am sure the majority of them are using Jira.

I would rate Jira an eight out of ten. No tool is perfect, and there is obviously room for improvement.

We used it in my previous organization for project management, product management, and release management. In my current organization, where I started working a week ago, we are using Jira strictly for help-desk tickets. We are using DevOps for our release management. So, we've got DevOps, Jira, and some homegrown stuff, and I'm trying to figure out what's going to work best for this new organization.

I've used Jira and Confluence previously, and this is my first time using the help-desk ticketing system. It is cool and not a whole lot different than SolarWinds or Zendesk, except the appearance of it is more Jira.

We were using Microsoft OneNote for systems engineering and network engineering. It was being used for our documentation, environments, and services, and it was a nightmare. We transitioned everybody and copied everything into Confluence. We were then able to tag specific tickets to the notes, and there were links between what work was recently done and the most updated notes in Confluence.

The roadmap feature and the ability to integrate with Power BI are probably the most valuable features in it. It is a great solution. I absolutely love it. It is a tool that was designed for project management, and it has been awesome to work with it so far. I also love Confluence.

They can maybe dumb down the directions for building the automation a little bit because to be able to build out the automation, I had to play around with it and learn what all the fields meant and what they were referencing. I don't have an IT background originally. My background is in biology, and I got into project management by chance. I am good at it, but I haven't really worked with coding languages. In terms of writing automation, it is easier for devs because they intuitively know what they're being asked, but as a PM who originally didn't have IT experience, it was a little bit daunting at first.

It could also have an extra hierarchy to be able to allow tasks under stories. It could be the way it is set up at our organization, but currently, under stories, you can have sub-tasks, but you can't create a task. Being able to customize your hierarchy a little bit more would be beneficial because sometimes, the devs would say, "Well, here's a story, and now we need sub-tasks," but as we were building out the sub-tasks, sometimes we had to go a step lower to dig in a little bit more, and we couldn't do that.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It has never gone down for me. It was always reliable, even from the mobile app.

It was fine. It seemed to integrate with all of our systems with ease. At my previous organization, there were probably 500 or 600 people using Jira. There were many different roles including product management, project management, VPs of IT and Ops, IT data services, developers, network engineers, systems engineers, and CBAs. It was a full scale of IT professionals.

At my current organization, where I started working a week ago, we are using Jira, but there are only a handful of people who are actually using it. It is strictly for help-desk tickets. I am trying to implement it and roll it out to the organization on a much larger scale, and I'm going to have to talk to them about pricing and other things. In this new organization, there are probably about 500 or 600 employees in total. Assuming I get the buy-in from everyone, which I don't think would be a problem, I would probably need at least a hundred licenses for users and then expand from there as needed.

I haven't interacted with their technical support, but I bet they would have been awesome.

I have used Smartsheet, MS Project, and Trello. Jira is more software-development-specific and a much easier tool to use.

In my previous organization, I believe its initial setup was complex. I was not at the administrative user level. I was given admin privileges for certain projects but not for the whole Jira. This is the first time I actually have admin privileges over all of Jira, and it was set up for me.

It probably took a few days. It would have also involved a lot of conversations and other stuff.

It would have been in-house. In terms of maintenance, it didn't seem to need maintenance from our side.

I would advise going with the entire Atlassian suite. Don't just use one aspect of Jira, unless you have a very specific need for using bits and pieces. Jira is better when Confluence and everything can be integrated, and you have source code management and all of that from the same software or platform.

I would rate Jira a ten out of ten. I love Jira. It has the ability to just do everything, and it is a one-stop shop for all of your IT software development needs.