Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Atlassian Confluence OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Atlassian Confluence is #1 ranked solution in top Enterprise Social Software, #1 ranked solution in top Knowledge Management Software, and #2 ranked solution in top Corporate Portals. PeerSpot users give Atlassian Confluence an average rating of 8.2 out of 10. Atlassian Confluence is most commonly compared to Microsoft Teams: Atlassian Confluence vs Microsoft Teams. Atlassian Confluence is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 68% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 18% of all views.
Atlassian Confluence Buyer's Guide

Download the Atlassian Confluence Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Atlassian Confluence?

Project management is easy with Atlassian's Confluence as your single source of truth. It integrates with JIRA so you can easily add context to your projects in one central location. Create and track issues & product requirements, publish release reports, track release progress, and more when you connect Confluence and JIRA. Confluence allows you to create, share, evolve, and capture your team's project documentation so you can collaborate better, smarter, and as a team.

Confluence also organizes your powerful repository of information, opinions, and knowledge to help you answer questions, create how-to docs, and possibly identify the next big thing. Logical and consistent management of knowledge and a powerful search engine ensure that you can always find the right content, when you need it most. Share, organize, and discover content all in one platform.

Confluence has multiple deployment options to provide the flexibility your organization needs.

Cloud is a fully hosted service for customers who want to iterate quickly and have us take care of managing the infrastructure.

For customers who need to run our applications behind their firewall, we have Server and Data Center options. Server delivers greater capacity for a larger user base and gives you more control, allowing you to remain compliant with your enterprise IT, security, IP and privacy policies. For our largest customers, Data Center provides all the capability of our Server option, along with high availability, instant scalability and performance at scale.

Atlassian also offers premium support and strategic services for enterprise customers. Technical Account Managers are cross-functional technical advisors providing proactive planning and strategic guidance across your organization. Premier Support goes above and beyond our standard offerings to give you account-wide support from a team of senior support engineers.

Atlassian Confluence was previously known as Confluence.

Atlassian Confluence Customers

Facebook, Skype, Microsoft, NASA, Netflix, Adobe, Bonobos, LinkedIn, Pfizer, Citi.

Atlassian Confluence Video

Atlassian Confluence Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Atlassian Confluence pricing:
  • "The price of the on-premises data center version is too expensive."
  • "There are some cases where you can go on Confluence as a public site without a license, but you will not have all of the features. You can also have a Confluence site that does not require a license just to read the articles. When you have Jira Service Management attached to Confluence, then you can go through the portal of Jira Service Management and read the Confluence articles without the license. This is good because when you are in an ITSM environment, you have many customers, and you do not want them to have to pay just to read articles. Regarding the use of the full features of Confluence, there is a license cost, and it depends on how many users you want."
  • "For us, it's free to use. We don't pay any licensing."
  • "The issues I have with the pricing are in respect to the add-ons."
  • "Maybe we're only using 10% of it, but we have to pay for everything."
  • Atlassian Confluence Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    WiseCat - PeerSpot reviewer
    Enterprise Architect, CISSP at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Good usability, helpful community support, and facilitates well-structured documentation
    Pros and Cons
    • "It has a very intuitive user interface, which every user able to manage the basic functionality of a PC will be able to work with and produce quite satisfactory results."
    • "Atlassian should rethink its withdrawal of the self-hosted version of the product. They only offer cloud-based service or the "datacenter-edition", which is quite expensive for small companies and private users."

    What is our primary use case?

    I primarily used this solution for IT documentation and documenting ISMS based on ISO 27001.

    With the Confluence Wiki, I implemented quite a series of successful IT and Security Documentation projects. Confluence was my preferred product when starting any collaboration project that had to produce comprehensive, centrally organized, and highly usable documentation.

    I worked on several projects that implemented an ISMS, based on the ISO 27001 standard, which mandates a "documented ISMS". I introduced Confluence as the tool to be used for that documentation.

    I used Confluence as the "self-hosted" server in VMs or on MiniPCs running Linux. I always added backup methods, so the HA functionality of the much more expensive "datacenter-edition" was never needed. The largest environment I worked in had 100+ active authors, but typically I would work with the 10- or 25-user license, which are both quite affordable even for small customers and where the server resources are manageable (From two to four virtual cores and 4-16GB RAM will do fine).

    How has it helped my organization?

    This solution worked fine until Atlassian decided to force everybody into the cloud.

    The most mentionable improvement is that documentation with Confluence gains a much better structure. Instead of hundreds of .doc and .xls files roaming the network shares and C: drives of team members, once you get Confluence set up, spend a few hours with all designated authors to define a few guidelines on how pages should look, be interlinked, and how to generally use the tool, the productiveness of creating and improving documentation is phenomenal!

    The key is to take the mentioned few hours, get everybody together and produce a "style guide", for want of a better word, about how to use Confluence. Then agree on the top-level structure of your documentation and if everybody accepts this and uses it in their work, all is fine.

    My recommendation is to meet for an hour every other week with those who work the most with the tool and fine-tune said "style guide" and the structure. This will help everybody to keep being motivated and to produce the best results. Also in such meetings, ideas about add-ons can be discussed and their integration planned.

    What is most valuable?

    Atlassian Confluence is a very good and seasoned Wiki Solution.

    First and foremost, I want to mention its top-notch usability. It has a very intuitive user interface, which every user able to manage the basic functionality of a PC will be able to work with and produce quite satisfactory results.

    There is a big and responsive community to help with questions and so far, Atlassian is still doing a good job to help.

    Also, there are add-ons from various sources, which can be integrated with the product quite easily and have good chances to function together as a whole, like intended.

    Another thing worth mentioning is the very good import and export functionality. You can just use Copy-Paste on a website or a document and Confluence will in most cases manage to reproduce the content quite recognizably. Export not only as XML, to be able to reimport, but also, PDF and Word DOCX work quite well. They can be further improved, speaking from personal experience with PDF files, by adding a few add-ons for formatting, page heading, and such.

    Oh, and last but not least the flexibility should be mentioned. If for any reason there is the need to change the structure of the contents, say to move a branch of pages from one top-level area to another, just copy them or export them and re-import them in their own area. Mostly, that works without a glitch (exceptions prove the rule) and even cross-area-links will continue to work. For more complicated restructuring, one can always use the XML-Export and load it into an XML-Editor. Of course, that´s for people who can read and understand XML structure.

    What needs improvement?

    Atlassian should rethink its withdrawal of the self-hosted version of the product. They only offer cloud-based service or the "datacenter-edition", which is quite expensive for small companies and private users.

    I have been using and recommending Atlassian Confluence for more than four years now, and never had to regret it until the end of 2020, when they suddenly got this cloud madness.

    Not only does the cloud version come nowhere near the responsiveness of the self-hosted version (which is a matter of course, as self-hosted servers are within the LAN with single-digit milliseconds of round trip time, whereas cloud-hosted servers will always have 20+ ms), but also it requires a customer to entrust their data to a third party, which is in many cases a no-go.

    The only way out would be to buy the "datacenter edition" and thus spend a whole lot more money on the product. This may be what Atlassian intended in the first place and if so, shame on them.

    With that, I will no longer recommend the product, as I am opposed to the cloud-first hype. Our data should be our own and we should be free to decide where we store them.

    Buyer's Guide
    Atlassian Confluence
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Atlassian Confluence. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    634,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using Atlassian Confluence for approximately five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    No complaints that I know of - unless some admin shoots the underlying VM (has been heard to happen), confluence is just rock-solid. To be sure: It needs some resources, and if the VM starves of memory or CPU, performance and stability will suffer.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    As I said, the largest environment i was working with at a customer has 100+ authors and I imagine plenty of pages and other content - sadly I do not know the exact figures - but we never had reason to complain in our project which only consisted of 12 people actively using Confluence. So I guess scalability should not be an issue.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Prior to Confluence, I tried working with Microsoft SharePoint. Well, there were those sad tries, and my advice is to forget it.

    SharePoint may have advantages when it comes to organize and share files, but the ease and intuitive way to create structured documentation just is not there.

    And as a sidenote: When working on projects we would oftentimes edit a page in confluence with three or four of us concurrently updating table entries or text segments. Very seldom have I experienced problems with allowing concurrent edits and in my mind never incorrect merging of inputs. Again, that is true for the on-premises self-hosted version, in the cloud that does not work quite as well.

    And why do I point this out: Have any of you tried to edit a word document in MS Teams concurrently? ... it produces quite funny effects but in my opinion cannot be trusted, really.

    How was the initial setup?

    The cases where I set up the server myself were straightforward and went without any glitch along the documented steps.

    What about the implementation team?

    Up until now I only had inhouse admins implement the servers, they did it noiselessly and with satisfying results.

    What was our ROI?

    Erm. ROI. Hm. Can anybody please call the finance guy? ...

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Well, that´s difficult now. Until the end of 2020, using a self-hosted server, have one of your IT-Admins set it up, costs $10 a year for the 10-Author license.

    Nowadays? Don´t use it. The price of the on-premises data center version is too expensive.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    To be honest, after being introduced to Confluence by a colleague all those years ago, I did not evaluate any other option in earnest.

    Recently, I started looking at Tiki Wiki, which is a fully OpenSource alternative, but I haven´t gotten around to installing it or using it in a new project.

    I would not consider alternatives but for the policy of Atlassian. Such a good product should run in every datacenter. NOT in the Clouds, though.

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice for everybody is to flame Atlassian into re-providing the self-hosted server version!

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Quality Assurance Team Lead at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    The solution has definitely improved our organization
    Pros and Cons
    • "We have found limiting permissions and history very valuable."
    • "The roadmap feature should be made easier to work with and modify. It's not really scalable."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use the solution for all kinds of documentation that are part of the testing, product, and development phases and for taking meeting notes. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    Atlassian Confluence has definitely improved our organization. Before Confluence, we only had documentation on JIRA. Now, the requirements are routinely documented. We use the solution for test planning and documentation-related testing. It is also extremely useful for technical documentation. You can create different spaces for the different teams. Atlassian Confluence has helped the company a lot.

    What is most valuable?

    We have found limiting permissions and history very valuable. History tracking is good, and so is commenting and tagging somebody when commenting. Other valuable features include linking Confluence and JIRA and having a Confluence cloud on Slack. The roadmap feature in Confluence is very good.

    What needs improvement?

    The comparing history versions feature could be improved. It's messy and not useful. I remember that it was much better initially. 

    The roadmap feature should be made easier to work with and modify. It's not really scalable. Confluence is hard to work with as well. Specifically, you cannot set the dates or choose shorter periods of time, like one day or two days. It looks a bit messy. I kept getting questions about it, so I added a note advising people not to pay too much attention to the inaccurate dates.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We've been using this solution for more than two years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The product has really great performance. There are no issues with that at all.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The team more than doubled in the last couple of years, and we didn't have any issues with scalability. It was very smooth.

    How are customer service and support?

    I never had any problems, so I never had any experience with customer service and support, and I don't believe anybody did, or they would've shared it on the channel. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously used JIRA, but it didn't work because the tickets became old, and it wasn't easy to tag where the documentation was. So that's why we switched to Confluence.

    There were no other options on the table before we went for Confluence because I wasn't on the committee that selected it. But using JIRA as an adapting product probably made the team choose Confluence faster. And some of the team had used it before. I had used a very simple version around five years before. So I had some experience with it. Of course, in five years, the tool had changed a lot.

    What was our ROI?

    Our ROI is more like something that helps us save money and share knowledge when onboarding new people or introducing existing employees to new processes, products and services and planning, but it doesn't really generate revenue. You could say that our ROI from this product is a monetary and quality-of-life improvement.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate Confluence eight on a scale of one to 10.

    I'm not sure whether all our applications are available on the same cloud. But one of the clouds we use is AWS. And since the product is on the cloud, we don't usually have any issues. You don't need to maintain it or make backups because you can contact the cloud provider and ask for whatever backup you need if anything is lost.

    I never encountered any problem with the solution that required help from support. So I never reported any issue to management, and I don't believe anybody else did, or it would've been shared on the channel. 

    It took us some time to benefit from Confluence because we had to create a documentation process, which meant adopting a document mindset to get into the habit of documenting, which was a real challenge. At first, we allocated around two hours a day for documenting, which didn't work. But as the QA team grew, we started documenting their processes, which greatly benefited us. We don't benefit much from the dev documentation, but the product and the QA team do. Though it took us a while to get into that state.

    I would say we use about 60 percent of the product's features 

    We currently have more than 30 people using Confluence in our company.

    My advice to anyone thinking about using or implementing Confluence is to start small and use it more and more as you get used to it. Start using it as part of your process. It's very important not to dedicate all your resources to it. Start bit by bit, and you'll benefit from it the most. That's how your employees get used to it. Start incorporating it into their processes, but don't enforce it, or it won't work properly. Like everything in life, you have to start small, and as you get used to it, you'll know exactly what you want from it and the best way to get it.

    Pioneering team members should start using Confluence, showcasing how it benefits the company. They should encourage colleagues and peers to use it. First users should also add articles and documentation so others can use the tool more easily. Without this encouragement, team members will completely ignore the tool, and it will be put down as lost expenses that didn't benefit the company.

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Atlassian Confluence
    September 2022
    Learn what your peers think about Atlassian Confluence. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
    634,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Hina Tufail - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Atlassian Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Is easy to set up, easy to use and understand, and is a great wiki
    Pros and Cons
    • "The templates are a valuable feature. You can make templates. There is a space inside where you can create pages. When you use the template, the page auto-generates text and images. You do not have to think about the structure of your page as well, which I think is a very good thing for a user. Because usually when you're in front of a blank page, it can be a bit dreadful to know where to start."
    • "Some macros can be technical, and they are better managed on the Confluence cloud rather than on-premises. For example, when you add an image on the cloud, you can resize it just by using the mouse. This is not the case on-premises yet. You have to write pixels of the size of the image sometimes. Some of the very old macros are still there, and some of them are technical. It can be hard for users if they are not from an IT background to understand how to use them quickly."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it for our knowledge base and also for internal blogging.

    What is most valuable?

    The templates are a valuable feature. You can make templates. There is a space inside where you can create pages. When you use the template, the page auto-generates text and images. You do not have to think about the structure of your page as well, which I think is a very good thing for a user. Because usually when you're in front of a blank page, it can be a bit dreadful to know where to start.

    What needs improvement?

    Some macros can be technical, and they are better managed on the Confluence cloud rather than on-premises. For example, when you add an image on the cloud, you can resize it just by using the mouse. This is not the case on-premises yet. You have to write pixels of the size of the image sometimes.

    Some of the very old macros are still there, and some of them are technical. It can be hard for users if they are not from an IT background to understand how to use them quickly.

    There's a feature that is really helpful that I like, but it is inside the cloud version and not in the on-premises version. It is the inline comment in edit mode. In fact, you can do inline comments on articles and pages on both the cloud and on-premises versions, but when you modify the page on the cloud, you can still see them but in edit mode. When you edit the page, you cannot see them anymore. You need to have two tabs in order to remember what the comments were.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using it for four years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Stability wise, Confluence is a reliable tool, and as a wiki, it's a good tool. So, there are no known performance issues.

    With regard to Confluence on-premises, the performance would obviously depend on the infrastructure and the hardware behind the installation. So, it won't really be linked to the tool.

    On the cloud side, the stability is okay as well.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Confluence is scalable on both the cloud and server data center. On the cloud, you can even go up to 10,000 users, which was not the case three or four years ago.

    We have nearly 300 users. We do our assignment reports on it, and some use it in sales. Managed services staff use it to share information with clients. It is used by everyone.

    How was the initial setup?

    The installation is easy, and there's nothing more to do after the installation. It can be ready to use very quickly.

    Deployment would probably take a day or two at the most. However, if the client needs advice regarding the structure of the company and how to do the knowledge base, then it can take several days. Usually, this is up to the organization, but as it's really quick to use, you can create whatever you want the day after the installation.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    There are some cases where you can go on Confluence as a public site without a license, but you will not have all of the features. You can also have a Confluence site that does not require a license just to read the articles.

    When you have Jira Service Management attached to Confluence, then you can go through the portal of Jira Service Management and read the Confluence articles without the license. This is good because when you are in an ITSM environment, you have many customers, and you do not want them to have to pay just to read articles.

    Regarding the use of the full features of Confluence, there is a license cost, and it depends on how many users you want.

    What other advice do I have?

    You should use Atlassian Confluence, but you should not expect it to behave like a document manager. People do ask me what the advantage of Confluence is compared to that of SharePoint, but in fact, this is not the same use case. SharePoint is for storing documents at a place, and Confluence is a wiki.

    I would recommend that you go for it but you will need to remember that it's a wiki and is not designed to store documents. It can store documents, but only up to a certain size. Also, it's not meant to be used to store documents.

    If you are looking to deploy your organization or your projects inside Confluence, do think about the right structure because it will influence the way your people use it. Think about how to deploy the structure of your projects or your documents inside the Confluence, and do not expect it to be a document manager.

    On a scale from one to ten, I would give Atlassian Confluence an eight because it's a great tool. It's a great wiki and is easy to use. It's easy to understand how to use it as well, particularly if you are from an IT background. Someone who is not from an IT background might need some help in the beginning on how to use it. The setup is really easy, and you do not need specific skills to deploy it. However, the comment feature and macros need improvement. It would be nice to have more templates in the future.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Delivery Lead at Cyma
    Real User
    Top 20
    Good notifications, great third-party add-ons and very stable
    Pros and Cons
    • "The integration's very good. You still have integration with lots of third party products, and it's very good."
    • "This is kind of by design, however, the lack of control in terms of editing the page to make it look the way you want it to look is an issue. It would be nice if there was more flexibility there."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use it as a knowledge management tool for all of our consultants, which are architects.

    What is most valuable?

    The whole solution is really great. I appreciate the ability to create content, link content, and then search for that content when I need to. 

    I love all of the add-ons the solution offers. You get the base product, and then you can plug in a ton of third-party apps. There's a whole ecosystem of third-party products you can add in if there are any features that may be missing on Confluence itself. That's really great. 

    There are very good notifications and links. You can subscribe to a page, and whenever that page gets edited, you're notified of a change on that page.

    I suppose just the whole structure and organization is what I really like about Confluence. You have at least 500 odd pages. The way it's structured, again, to speed up the ability to find stuff, is phenomenal. 

    The self-service capabilities are helpful. Anyone can create content. We do, in fact. It's not one person running lots and lots of pages of content, it's everyone. You can self-service, update, and change things yourself, which is good. It's a great collaboration endeavor. We are a team of 15 people and we'll leverage the content we've created previously. The ability to collaborate on the content is quite critical to us.

    The integration's very good. You still have integration with lots of third party products, and it's very good. 

    What needs improvement?

    We've used a lot of time in correcting our knowledge in this product. Can't really think of a negative feature of the product.

    This is kind of by design, however, the lack of control in terms of editing the page to make it look the way you want it to look is an issue. It would be nice if there was more flexibility there.

    It's only a very constrained format you can use. You cannot change the font and you can't really make them smaller. It is by design, but it doesn't like people playing with those aspects. It's probably gone a bit too far. The inability to format the layout of a page is an issue for us.

    The logic for searching for pages is a bit off. I assumed it would be very smart in terms of looking at the content on your page and looking at what people clicked on. I assumed it would be like Google in that it would know what people clicked on previously when they were looking for this keyword, what page do they click on, et cetera. It doesn't. I found some detailed explanation of exactly how the search works and it's quite disappointing. It's very basic. Search largely depends on the title of your actual document. It doesn't look at the words in the document, and doesn't look at the search history, in terms of how people pick pages.

    It turns out that the searching algorithms are very basic. When I assumed the product was bad, it was actually due to the fact that most of the knowledge management tools have very smart searching logic. This one doesn't. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using the solution for probably less than a year. It hasn't been too long.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is reliable. I haven't seen a single bug or issue with the product. It's very stable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have about 15 users on the solution currently.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    As a company, we use Microsoft Teams. A lot of our customers say, "Oh, I know, we've got the same features in Microsoft Teams." However, that really isn't the case. Usually, if you're in a Microsoft shop, you would try and use all the Microsoft products. This is one space where Microsoft Teams doesn't cut it. We're using the Confluence instead.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is very, very good. It's not complex it all. It's very straightforward and they make it very easy.

    The entire setup isn't an intricate process. We didn't have to pour over documentation to try and figure things out. We just followed our instincts and it worked out quite well.

    What about the implementation team?

    We handled the implementation ourselves. We didn't need any assistance from consultants or integrators.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    For us, it's free to use. We don't pay any licensing.

    What other advice do I have?

    We don't have a business relationship with Atlassian. We're just customers.

    We're using the latest version of the solution.

    This solution is highly recommended. If you're looking for a product in this space, this is the best. We had another really good tool, however, we find Confluence does the same and a whole lot more. I'd say in the knowledge management space, as far as we've been doing our business, and our job is to find tools for organizations, I'm convinced that this is the top product in this space.

    Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. My one issue is the search capabilities. Otherwise, it's pretty perfect.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    CEO & CPO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Confluence is a great solution for early-stage documentation and communication.
    Pros and Cons
    • "With respect to our experiences with Confluence, we haven't had any issues."
    • "It would be interesting if they had graphical templates that allowed typical agile ceremonies to be documented better."

    What is our primary use case?

    We mainly used Jira for backlog management within IT development landscapes. We used Confluence for early-stage documentation and communication within and across teams.

    Since we worked mostly with large enterprises, they typically install and host any server-based solutions on their own.

    What is most valuable?

    The interesting thing is the connector between Jira and Confluence (it works wiki-like and provides a deep-connection with links between both systems). The alternative is to run for early-stage backlog-items in immature state a separate wiki-instance that would not feature the proper linkage of backlog-entries automatically.

    What needs improvement?

    With respect to Confluence, it would be interesting if they had graphical templates that allowed typical agile ceremonies to be documented better. For example, one of the agile cadences that we regularly run is risk roaming. Confluence, as of now, doesn't provide any kind of graphical support for creating a two-by-two portfolio matrix design or even something similar. Basically, Confluence is heavily text-based. Some of my customers have actually started to tweak the system a bit and implement workarounds. On the screen, you can make it look as if it is a two-by-two portfolio; however, if there were templates provided, that would be great. The basic graphical templates that are used regularly in management would be fine. It would be great to see them supported in the future. 

    In regards to Jira, it would be nice if they had two-dimensional features for backlog support. At the moment, backlog management is always a flat, one-dimensional list but our customers actually prefer having the opportunity to have that read out in a graphical fashion as well. That way, there's so much more overview and they can cluster smaller backlog items that come as a bunch. It just provides much more clarity.

    Jira still seems to have issues on modelling Kanban-systems - as far as I know it still doesn't support the so-called "commitment point" (i.e. creating a non-romovable time-stamp when moving a ticket onto a board) helpful in creating transparency about start- and end-time of performing an activity — similar to signing a document in writing.

    Think of it this way: if you take an item into a boardroom, it must be noted and signed. It should be done in pencil where the data could be erased later on, rather, it should be stamped — basically, you are not losing the data again. That is still an issue with these systems. That's one of the reasons why many teams who want to run Kanban methodology don't want to use Jira. They tend to use other software, which is able to do these sorts of things. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Until 2018, I was employed with an applier of Atlassian solutions. Within that context, I used Confluence for a year. I have used Jira 2012—2018 as an end-user myself. From then onwards, I was more of a consultant to other companies implementing and using similar solutions. In short, if you count only end-usage, then it's 6 years with Jira and one year with Confluence.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    With respect to our experiences with Confluence, we haven't had any issues; however, we definitely have had issues within the Jira environment back in 2014.

    Scalability issues should have been fixed by now - they arose back in 2010-2014 at one of the largest enterprise implementations for multi-1.000s of concurrent users on the system, causing the system to operate very slow - I would expect that by 2020 this is treated accordingly to make the system scale without loss of performance. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I have not personally contacted Atlassian's technical support. It was always routed via the respective IT staff, which I was not involved with.

    How was the initial setup?

    I was not involved with technical administration or the implementation procedure from an IT infrastructure team perspective. For this reason, I can't speak for individual customers.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The problem with the pricing model is not so much the price for the Atlassian basic software itself; the issues I have with the pricing are in respect to the add-ons. The problem with add-on pricing is that it typically is always calculated based on the amount of basic Confluence or Jira licenses. Since some of the add-ons will only get used by a very limited number of users, having to pay for the full implementation (for all the people using Confluence or Jira), seems like an unfair pricing model. It also prohibits the usage of certain add-ons, too. Certain add-ons from a functionality-perspective are much more exclusive to only a few users. That pricing model should be reviewed and potentially edited or amended to make it more flexible.

    What other advice do I have?

    On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. If they added the graphical templates, I would give them a higher rating.

    To me, as an end-user, the topical templates are pretty basic. Under the current conditions, since COVID-19, our teams have tried to become more virtual in their collaboration model. The collaboration model that we had installed before, face-to-face, couldn't be transferred, which is kind of a pity because the graphical features are missing.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
    PeerSpot user
    Human Resources Executive at Sticky IO
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    A solution that is straightforward to set up and has good scalability, but needs a more flexible pricing model
    Pros and Cons
    • "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"
    • "There needs to be a flexible pricing model, where we can pick and choose services and customize our pricing model."

    What is our primary use case?

    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.

    How has it helped my organization?

    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.

    What needs improvement?

    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.

    For how long have I used the solution?

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

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    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.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

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

    How are customer service and support?

    The solution has good support.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    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.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was straightforward and quick. 

    What about the implementation team?

    We used CodeFish for deployment. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    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.

    What other advice do I have?

    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.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Styliana Araouzou - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Operations Analyst at Etoro
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Great version control with an easy initial setup and lots of plugins
    Pros and Cons
    • "The initial setup is very easy."
    • "The product is considered expensive."

    What is our primary use case?

    We're using Confluence as a document management solution. Confluence includes all our documents internally in the company in regards to policies or how to document or about business requirement documents. Therefore, it's a document management system for us.

    What is most valuable?

    Confluence can give you the possibility of installing plugins to meet your different needs and you can cover all your needs. Most of them are free to install.

    The initial setup is very easy.

    What needs improvement?

    Due to the fact that there are so many diverse plugins available, the solution really isn't missing any features. 

    The product is considered expensive. 

    In the future, I would like to be able to copy from other documents, local documents on your PC, and paste them into Confluence pages while keeping the formatting. At the moment, you can copy and paste, however, all your formatting disappears. This is one of the features that I would want. 

    In terms of the feature for uploading documents, at the moment, when you want to upload documents from your local PC into Confluence, you can do it. However, when you want to make updates on your document, you need to download it from Confluence, make the changes in the document, and then upload it again. Instead of doing this, instead of downloading the document from Confluence, it's better to have the possibility to make your changes in Confluence and open the document in Confluence instead of downloading everything.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using the solution for four years. It's been a while now. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's stable. It's a really stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have 50 people on the solution and we have no plans to increase usage. I can't, therefore, really speak to the scalability potential.

    How are customer service and support?

    I've never had to reach out to technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. 

    How was the initial setup?

    I found the implementation process to be simple and straightforward. It's not complex at all. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I don't handle the licensing aspects of the product. I'm unsure as to the exact costs. It's my understanding, however, that it is an expensive product. On a scale from one to five, where one is cheap and five is expensive, I'd rate it at a three and a half. 

    What other advice do I have?

    We're a customer and an end-user.

    I'm not sure which version of the solution I am using at this time. 

    I'd advise new users to not be scared, to play with anything on it, or create documents and delete documents. It keeps tracking the item version. It keeps a version history so that you can revert all your changes back. Never be scared to play with Confluence.

    I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. It's an easy tool to use. It gives you the possibility to integrate it with JIRA. All your documents and business documents can be connected to JIRA. With the versioning available in Confluence, history versioning, if you delete something, you can always find it. If someone changes anything in the document, you can find it from the history. It's a really good product.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Joseph Tharakan - PeerSpot reviewer
    Application Architect at Allianz Insurance
    Real User
    Valuable integration with Jira and auditing capabilities that effectively manage documentation, but lacks support for Markdown and adding code
    Pros and Cons
    • "We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket."
    • "I think the couple of improvement areas would be around Markdown support and support for adding code."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this solution for documentation purposes. It's very tightly integrated with Jira, so we handle project management with Jira and document management with Confluence.

    What is most valuable?

    We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket. The way both work together helps us to reduce the duplication of the codes, and if we need to have documentation, we describe it in Confluence and tag the page in the Jira ticket for someone to work on, which reduces the duplication of work.

    On each page, we can see the different version updates that have already been done by colleagues. It's auditable, which helps us to figure out what changes have been done at what point. Documentation with an auditing capability helps us to manage the overall documentation effectively.

    What needs improvement?

    Nowadays, the standard for documentation for developers is mostly in Markdown, so pretty much everything we can do is in the Markdown language. The support for Confluence to import something that's in Markdown is not that great. Sometimes it's also not that great when it comes to including code snippets or similar things, so I think the couple of improvement areas would be around Markdown support and support for adding code.

    As for added features, I would like to see more flexibility in the way we can design a workflow in Confluence, and maybe some templates that we can use based on the purpose of the document. 

    I would also like to see more integration with other common application services. Other than draw.io, there is not much integration to other services like Lucidchart or similar services, which are helpful for reporting your documentation with drawings and architecture diagrams. Those improvements would make it a bit more user-friendly.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for five years now. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability partly depends upon the resources that you allocate for the solution, but it's pretty much been stable for the last couple of years that I've been working with it.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable and it's centrally controlled, and we have a couple of central responsibility roles for adding new users. It's helpful for us on the backend because if we want to provide access to different sets of people, some may need edit access, some may need read-only access, and we utilize those different permissions.

    How are customer service and support?

    Other than utilizing the public documentation that is available, I haven't reached out to the support team.

    How was the initial setup?

    I was not very involved in the setup of Confluence, but my understanding is that it was not that difficult.

    What other advice do I have?

    Confluence might be a burden to small and medium companies, like startups, so I probably would not recommend it to them, but I would definitely recommend it for companies at the enterprise level.

    I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten because we found it helpful. It's good if you are in need of long-term documentation of projects, both on the functional side and the technical side, but at the same time, it needs some improvements, like more integration to other solutions. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user