Atlassian Confluence Reviews

I'm working on a project in a Standards organization that's using Atlassian Confluence as a tool for collaboration.

The organization integrates Atlassian Confluence with another Atlassian product called Jira for the concurrent development of documentation for the project. Jira is used to raise issues you implement and trace back to Atlassian Confluence for collaborative development.

My organization primarily uses Atlassian Confluence for the collaborative development of projects. The organization has plenty of projects in development, and there's a space in Atlassian Confluence for sharing documentation, raising issues, producing documentation directly on the tool, and exporting documents using some filters my organization developed because the final document is in Word format.

What's most valuable to me in Atlassian Confluence is that it allows the concurrent development of documentation. I also like how you can add comments offline and implement changes directly on the document. Atlassian Confluence is a very nice platform for my purposes. It's a good tool.

An area for improvement in Atlassian Confluence is encouraging more vital interaction among the project members or users involved. I was researching a tool, but I forgot the exact name of the tool, and that tool could be used for better interactions offline among users on a specific topic, development, or discussion. I want that feature to be present in Atlassian Confluence. If there's a possibility to integrate Atlassian Confluence, Jira, and that other tool, that will make Atlassian Confluence better.

My team had problems accessing Atlassian Confluence a couple of times, but I wonder if that was due to a network, server, or tool issue. I have to say that I've been working with Atlassian Confluence for years, and it has been improving its functionalities, so I feel that as a tool, it's working very well, but some features could still be improved.

For example, the search engine should allow you to define some keywords you could use when searching, though I wonder if it's staff-related or setup-related, or lacking in the search engine function itself.

I also want artificial intelligence added to Atlassian Confluence where you're working on a specific issue or argument, and Atlassian Confluence, through its AI, can propose some improvements based on what has been done on the same topic by different teams or different projects within the same infrastructure, similar to an internal reference, which can be helpful. Through AI, it would also be great if Atlassian Confluence could advise you on what has been done outside your specific project, and maybe there's the possibility of an installation where you have several projects installed and working together.

Another feature that would be good to have in the next release of Atlassian Confluence is the tool recognizing a keyword or two that's fully developed in project B, which you can use in project A, for example.

I've been using Atlassian Confluence for many years, though I don't remember exactly when I started. I've been using Jira far longer, even in my previous organization, then I moved to my current organization, which uses Atlassian Confluence integrated with Jira.

Atlassian Confluence is a stable tool.

The initial setup for Atlassian Confluence isn't easy. It would be best if you had some time to understand how to approach the tool entirely, but it doesn't take up so much time. Atlassian Confluence has many features, which is why it's normal if it's a little bit complex, though Jira is even more complex.

Atlassian Confluence is similar to Jira because it takes more than five minutes to create dashboards and tickets, for example. It also takes time to involve the team and understand Atlassian Confluence and its functionalities. Though the tool is flexible enough to start using it without complete knowledge, the more you use it and get more involved with it, the better you can understand Atlassian Confluence and use all features it provides better.

I'm not aware of how long it took for the tool to be implemented because it was handled by a different team, though I believe the team in charge customized Atlassian Confluence with the help of some experts or third parties.

An in-house team implemented Atlassian Confluence with the help of third-party experts.

To my knowledge, Atlassian Confluence had a pricing approach which is a commercial open-source solution, so that if you are a company, you had to pay an amount. This fee was not huge compared to other traditional solutions, and it was free for personal use or if you were an individual. I'm unsure if Atlassian is implementing the same pricing approach for Atlassian Confluence nowadays.

I evaluated Microsoft Teams in my previous organization, but I found Atlassian Confluence far more flexible and useful than Microsoft Teams. There is no space for comparing Microsoft Teams and Atlassian Confluence because Atlassian Confluence is undoubtedly more effective and efficient, in my opinion.

I remember that I'm using the latest version of Atlassian Confluence.

To my knowledge, maintenance of Atlassian Confluence is handled internally, and the organization also pays a team from Atlassian to do maintenance.

Thousands of people use Atlassian Confluence, but I cannot give the exact number because my organization has thirty to forty projects developed concurrently, with at least ten to twelve people periodically working on it, then some active and not-so-active people using Atlassian Confluence. Thousands of people use Atlassian Confluence, particularly for the write mode, document production, etc.

My advice to people who want to implement the tool is not to renounce it if they find difficulties initially because you can start using it from scratch with the basic functionalities. Then, when you discover other functionalities within Atlassian Confluence that can be useful, you can explore those at best.

I'm still determining exactly how much customization my organization has done in the tool and if that's relevant. I'm uncertain if it's different if your tool has the standard features versus the highly customized version of Atlassian Confluence. 

Still, it's undoubtedly a good tool for collaboration, including remote collaboration. I can work with people in China and the States without any problem, and you can quickly identify any changes you or other users make. This is precisely why Atlassian Confluence is recommended for remote collaboration.

My rating for Atlassian Confluence is eight out of ten.

My organization is a user of Atlassian Confluence.

We used Atlassian Confluence for product development, help desk, and product documentation. Our team uses it for setting up teams, workflow management, product documentation, HR documentation, marketing, and I even used it with my son for his school work.

We use Atlassian Confluence to create a training program for software and agile methodologies, including agile business processes. Additionally, we use it extensively for various purposes, ranging from team meetings and marketing plans to drafting and planning service offerings along with all their components.

The most beneficial aspect is real-time collaboration, allowing multiple users to work on the same documents simultaneously. Additionally, Confluence offers seamless integration with other systems and the web, enabling the consolidation of information from various sources onto a single page. These capabilities can prove highly workable when integrated with Slack, Google Drive, and Microsoft 365 tools. Additionally, Jira is used giving no integration issues.

Confluence could incorporate stronger records management and automation features. The current management structure is too open, which becomes an issue.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for 3 years.

We have connectivity issues sometimes. Else, it's pretty solid.

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten.

We have more than 15,000 users on it. There were no problems with the solution's speed.

We had in-house experts. Customer service is responsive. Additionally, they have a strong online community of experts. You can simply post your question on their community homepage, and someone will promptly respond with valuable ideas.

The initial setup is straightforward, and takes less than five minutes to register and create your first site.

You can use it risk-free for up to ten users.

Confluence offers monthly subscriptions, but if you go through a value-added reseller, you can opt for annual payments. Additionally, if you add applications from their App Store, you pay for all the total users of that license instead of just those who need it.

There are no technical guys needed. You can do it as an individual, in house. as a team. Confluence is very user-friendly, easy to understand, and has many templates. It is easy and fast to use and has many features that I highly recommend.

There are so many valuable features in Atlassian Confluence. Firstly, it enables real-time collaboration, allowing multiple users to work on a single document with complete version control, making tracking changes and identifying contributors easy. Secondly, it offers the ability to index various related documents or references into a single page without moving or copying the original documents. This feature is incredibly convenient. Additionally, the web version of Confluence provides a user-friendly markup and interface, allowing for the easy creation of graphs and marketing materials. It also allows for rough layout designs directly on the screen, eliminating the need for complex software like Publisher or Adobe.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use Atlassian Confluence for the documentation of the application or applications that we are billing. 

Confluence has other functions. My team uses, Confluence every day, but I am just writing some information there that is used for the entire team and is vital for the entire team. 

We are also writing various kinds of material. It is useful for the team to interact and convey information, as well as to document only the information that we use.

I only use it occasionally to check up on documentation or to compose something. 

That is what I am doing. That is the only thing my team uses, however, we also use Confluence to communicate information to the customer. 

Our Confluence is available to the customer. 

We are working on the release notes, and he can get data or the most recent version via our app.

I work with Confluence, however, I'm not sure what's lacking.

The price could be improved. I have heard that certain adjustments would be made in 2024 and that it will then be more expensive, but I don't know the specifics.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for one year.

We are using the premium version.

Atlassian Confluence is quite stable. I have not had any problems with the stability.

Atlassian Confluence is scalable, and usable from anywhere, as well as from my phone. There are various Confluence or Jira applications, I can access the data immediately anytime I want.

We have multiple projects and half of my colleagues are using it. We have approximately 25 users in our organization.

We have plans to increase our usage. 

We intend to extend it throughout the entire organization. We want to conduct certain HR initiatives on Jira as well. 

Our HR department may also collaborate with them and Jira. I believe it is a useful tool.

I have not contacted technical support.

I use Jira to manage everything in development, and I also use it because we operate in Scrum.

I also use YouTrack.

We used Word to document everything, but that should be the last THRIVE threaded with SharePoint. But, in my opinion, the ideal way is to use all of Confluence for that.

I was not involved with the initial setup. It was done by my colleague.

We now have two or three persons setting up our administrators, and they are setting up some data and looking after the maintenance.

We have to pay licensing fees.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I think that it is one of the best products on the market from my experience.

I would rate Atlassian Confluence a nine out of ten.

The company needed a tool that project managers put their plans, documentation, and everything related to project management into, including milestones that are not available on Jira. They have to use both this and Jira in order to give a full report to management.

When you're working with Agile, you can't go through from one sprint to another without having a good burndown chart. 

I love the reports and the Confluence board. 

The search functionality is great. 

For me, the initial setup is easy. 

The solution is scalable.

It's a stable product. 

I have a problem with the burndown chart, for example, if I put a time only on the estimation block, it'll not show on the burndown chart. It has to be the points.

I'd like to see better reporting.

The UX is a little bit all over the place. From my experience, people really find it very hard to cope with Jira when they start using that.

The setup could be streamlined further. 

I've used the solution for about 12 years. 

The stability is great. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The product scales well. 

We started at 100 users and have since scaled to 300 users. We will continue to increase usage. 

We previously used a local tool. We needed something better for handling project management. 

The implementation process is easy for me. People sometimes find it easy and yet there is room for improvement in the process. 

We advised a third party on how our workflows needed to be implemented and they implemented them on the cloud. Then they moved the project to our cloud and set it as a base for everything there. It was actually really smooth. It didn't take too much time.

The full implementation strategy took two months. 

There was a little bit of complication from the bank side. We have a lot of security, unblocked IPS, et cetera. The two months weren't the full implementation time. We had areas that were blocked due to our security control. A couple of times we remained blocked for one week. I want to say the ideal time for the implementation was one month and a week. For us, of course, it took longer. 

We had five people in total ding the deployment. There were three from our side and two from the third party. 

I'd rate the entire process a three out of five in terms of the ease of implementation. 

We have a contract for handling maintenance. The vendor partners are handling it. 

A third-party handled the implementation process. 

I can't speak to the exact cost of the solution. 

We are users and work directly with a vendor partner. 

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I love Confluence. I'd recommend it to other users. People should try it out. It would be very helpful. 

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

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.

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.

I've been using it for four years.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

We primarily use the solution for software engineering.

We document all of our software development workflows and the test cases around each software feature, which has been quite helpful for our organization.

The integration capabilities are very useful.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It is stable and reliable.

I find the product to be scalable.

The cost of the solution is too high.

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

The solution is stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

It is scalable and expands well. 

We have 42 people using the solution. We do have plans to increase usage. 

Technical support has been helpful and responsive. 

Positive

We did not previously use a different solution. 

The product is easy to set up. It's not a complex process. 

Overall, the product requires zero maintenance. 

We have seen an ROI while using the solution. 

I find the solution to be expensive. We pay $350 a month to use the solution. 

I did not evaluate any other solution before choosing this product. 

This is a SaaS solution. There is no particular version of the product. 

I'd advise potential new users that they cannot implement Confluence without Jira.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. I've been very happy with its capabilities. 

There are some documents for users, some for developers, and some workspaces for projects, both in Jira and others for internal business processes within our company. It's not for customers, only for internal use.

The most valuable feature for me is the structure of documents. The page tree feature is more convenient for me.

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing.

I have been using this solution for around four years. 

It is a stable solution. We never faced any problem with stability.

The scalability is enough for our use cases. It covers all our needs. 

There was no problem with the setup process. 

When we started using Confluence, it was more convenient for us, but later, it became more expensive. Unfortunately, the data center version is expensive for us. So, it could be a bit cheaper.

In my opinion, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use it as a knowledge base system for sharing knowledge and creating Kanban boards.

What I find the most valuable about Confluence is how easy it is to use. In addition, we have a lot of good clients and it can help us achieve a lot of things.

The area that needs improvement is the search capability. It should have generalized capabilities. The support should be better when it comes to analytics features.

I have been working with Atlassian Confluence for over five years.

The solution is quite stable. I give it an eight out of ten. 

The scalability of the solution is amazing. It supports a lot of pages and it's very helpful. I give it a nine out of ten. 

Approximately 300 people are using Atlassian Confluence within my business unit and there are around 1,000 users in the company. 

We haven't had many issues with the solution. Another team at our company handles the technical support, an IT expert who manages Confluence.

The initial setup is simple although it was not done by our team. We had a separate team do it for us.

When it comes to affordability, I give it an eight out of ten. It's reasonably priced since many people are using it.

Microsoft SharePoint is a bit fancier and can possibly achieve more complex things than Atlassian Confluence, but it's not easy to use. Confluence is simpler, and the integration with Jira is good.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. I would definitely recommend it.

I manage the solution in my organization.

I have used the solution both on-premises and on cloud. Using the solution on-premises is easier than using the cloud version. The cloud version is a different product. The on-premises version has more features.

There were 1,500 people using Confluence at my previous company.

The trial stages, the ability to connect it to Jira, and the ability to export in PDF are all good capabilities.

I would like Confluence to include the ability to draw flowcharts and diagrams.
There's a small tool that you can use to draw, but it was very cumbersome. When you have to import or paste the pictures, you have to get that information into the table columns. When you're merging or unmerging, the table can break. Copy and paste on Excel doesn't work easily because Excel is the primary tool that most people use.

Excel is very easy to use. Confluence has issues with usability. It's slightly cumbersome. If they made it more usable with Excel and drawings, it would be a much more powerful tool.

I worked with Confluence for three years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten. We didn't have many issues with stability.

The scalability is fine on-premises. We had some issues with the scalability on the cloud.

We had an internal IT team for support.

We mainly use SharePoint to store documents. We use Confluence as a document creator and storage tool.

Setup is pretty simple. We did the basic setup. When we created a project, we could give access to people and start creating a trial page, parent page, etc.

I would rate Confluence as seven out of ten. 

My advice is go for more features so that the templates can be used. The base version of cloud isn't that usable. There are huge differences between the two.

We use it to manage different documentation such as PDFs and PowerPoint. It's similar to Dropbox but is more organized. We have approximately 1,000 users that make use of this solution in our business. 

The customization that Confluence offers is one of its most useful features. You can customise it based on the specific project you are working on. It also supports multiple languages. 

I also like using the web browser version of this solution and the fact that it is easy to search. You are able to see more that ten rows of results. 

We currently only use this solution for retrieving information. In a previous company, I also used it for HR and onboarding. The one way in which this solution could be improved is by offering better design and UI.

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This is a stable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten for stability. 

This is a scalable solution. It is built on a crop base and so adding additional documents is simple. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

This is a very expensive solution. 

We compared this solution with Lark and I think Lark is a better option. When using Confluence, you can only search using a search bar. When using Lark, you can search through a messaging bot and everything is translated. For example, Chinese words can be translated into English without requiring AI. 

I would rate this solution a six out of ten. It is one of the most well known solutions but comes at a high price and does not offer the best functionality.