Atlassian Confluence Reviews

The sharing of information and simple formatting are valuable features. That is, there are no templates, and everything uses one format. This means that people don't need to worry about formatting.

When we have a project that we don't want to share with everybody but want people to know that it exists, there is no way to do this in Confluence. When a project is not shared, people cannot see that it exits.

I've been working with Confluence for eight years. It was initially on-premises, but we moved to the cloud four years ago.

It's stable, and we haven't had any issues at all.

We haven't had any problems with scalability. We have about 300 users.

Some technical support staff are very helpful, but some just send documentation that is not very helpful. I would say that technical support needs improvement.

I didn't do the initial setup, but I think it's pretty easy. When I had to configure a new site, it was very easy.

SharePoint is very confusing, but Atlassian Confluence is very simple. After a couple of days, most people understand how it works, and it's quite simple.

I recommend Confluence to any company that wants to share information inside the company. Confluence is great; it's like a wiki. I would give it an eight out of ten.

I use Confluence for project documentation and team collaboration.

With Confluence, everything is in one place, so it's easy to find documentation. This means we don't need to use other tools, like SharePoint.

Confluence's best features are very easy content writing and publishing. It also has good integration with other Atlassian products, Jira in particular.

Some elements of the user interface could be more user-friendly, including embedding diagrams. In the next release, I'd like to see better integration with diagramming tools or software architecture.

I've been using Confluence for a few years.

Confluence is stable and dependable.

Confluence's scalability is good and can handle many parallel users.

Atlassian's technical support is good.

Positive

The initial setup was easy and happened in the background.

We used an Atlassian support company for the initial deployment.

Confluence charges an extra fee for analytics.

I would recommend Confluence to other users because it's easy to use and integrates well with other documentation tools. I would give Confluence a rating of eight out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

The solution has good support.

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.

The initial setup was straightforward and quick. 

We used CodeFish for deployment. 

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.

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.

We are using it for collaboration, team communication, documentation portal, and sometimes project-related content. We keep the details of the project and related documents.

It is a good collaboration tool. You share the document content and also its history through Atlassian Confluence so that you can trace its development. Also, you can add comments to the project-related items in order to track the history. It has JIRA integration in a way that you can combine the project-related dashboards into one space. This increases the communication between the teams. It is a good way to record know-how basis. You can use it as a know-how base for newcomers to be initiated more easily to the items provided.

It is easy to use and create new page content. It has macros and some stamp dates for your projects. If you would like to make something new that you have not done before, it is usually easy to find out on the internet. There is a lot of information available and the search function is excellent. You can search in different spaces and get answers for items you want to find easily.

I would like to see more macros provided by the company. Currently, those macros require extra cost. Additional free capability for those types of integration or components would be helpful in the existing license.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for almost four years.

It is very stable. I have not seen any virus interruption or issue related to the stability.

I would say that Atlassian Confluence is scalable we have more than one thousand users.

Currently, I have not contacted technical support.

We implemented it through a third party.

We went with Atlassian Confluence because JIRA had the same type of usage.

If you need to create some teamwork spaces it is very good. I would rate Atlassian Confluence a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to manage the knowledge base within our organization. We're looking to use Confluence for collaboration and data, sharing information internally and externally. Confluence is connected to our JIRA, so we also use it for task management. And vice versa, JIRA can link to the Confluence page. We are customers of Confluence and I'm a data manager.

It's great for us that this is a free format. It's easy to share information with other people and the integration with JIRA is good. The product is getting better all the time with a new template and new functionalities. This is a robust, agile, and reliable tool for collaborating. 

The search function is not great. That's one area where we feel that Confluence is lacking. The second issue is that an additional license is required when you are sharing data externally. There are a couple of instances where we've had integration issues with other apps and that needs to be improved. I'd like to see more of a workflow process. For example, an approval process, where you get through one layer and then go to the next layer, like the process that SharePoint has. 

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The product is becoming more stable and reliable these days, I think. A couple of versions ago we had some issues when a lot of users were updating to the same page or sharing documents. It's much more reliable now and we haven't had any problems in the past six months. 

Our company is not that big so we haven't needed to scale. 

We deployed in-house. 

Licensing is not very expensive. The issue is that engagement with an external party or stakeholder requires the purchase of an additional license. It's the same issue if we have a consultant coming on board and is a pain point for us.

It's important to understand your needs in terms of the number of processes and number of people you need to support in your organizational structure. Implementing up front will likely help in terms of knowing in advance that the product will be supported. Otherwise, there might be a situation where the configuration will need to be changed after the initial setup. Confluence was initially somewhat complex for us. There were a lot of things we needed to consider and configure. Over time as we grow and evolve as a business we're getting more of an understanding of how the solution works and it's getting easier. There's a learning curve.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Our different business units use it for different purposes. We have analysts, developers, DevOps team members, project managers and product managers using it. All these roles use it for artifacts for the jobs they need to do. 

The best feature is the automatic tagging of information in documents. The automatic algorithm highlights irrelevant information that conflict with the actual documents.

You can add different tables and text and format it for different purposes. The integration with JIRA and other tools is quite useful. The different plugins for different purposes are also great. 

The flexibility and simplicity of this solution could be improved. We would also like the ability to add plugins. 

I have used this solution for eight years.

This is a stable solution. We have not experienced any cases of instability.

You need extra time and money to make it useful for a large number of people.

The initial setup is rather straightforward. 

If you are looking for a simple solution to generate documents and artifacts in one place and a simple tool for rules of privacy of this information, I would recommend Confluence. 

If you have a large number of employees or complex processes, you need to have extra time and money to develop tools for Confluence. It doesn't have a pre-built solution for difficult cases for cross functional teams and connections of subjects.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. Confluence is a good collaborative tool for work with artifacts of documents, but it has room for improvement. That's why I would rate it a seven and not eight or nine.

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 use Atlassian Confluence for creating different pages, and projects on it.

The most valuable feature of Atlassian Confluence it's very easy to use and there are different options. 

We have to use other applications that make Atlassian Confluence more customized for what you want. They should improve by adding the ability to make more customizations.

In a future release, they could add easy reporting. For example, EZPi can be deployed easily into 

I have used Atlassian Confluence within the last 12 months.

Atlassian Confluence is stable.

We have not had a problem scaling up Atlassian Confluence.

We have approximately 300 people using the solution in my company. We all use it on a daily basis.

I have not used the support from Atlassian Confluence. It is an easy tool to use. You do not need a lot of help, but you do need some training.

The setup of Atlassian Confluence can be difficult and other times easy because if you want to implement something, you need to have your process figured out. You have to understand exactly for what purpose you want to use something. Once you understand that, you have to know how you're going to use it. Not only immediately, but also in the future. Once you have this map, then you will be able to use a tool properly. Otherwise, you will be doing trial and error for a while.

If you want to get Atlassian Confluence up and running, the time is depending on whether you want something simple or customized. However, it can be done within a week and have everything running.

There is a license needed to use Atlassian Confluence.

We are using Atlassian Confluence because we mainly implement Atlassian tools for customers. It is helpful for us to use them to understand our customers' needs if there is a problem.

It is important to know what the client wants to use this solution for. After knowing what they want to use it for I would advise them to use it or not.

I rate Atlassian Confluence a ten out of ten.

We use Confluence to share weekly project information. Everyone in the company uses it daily from project managers down. 

It's easy to search for information.

I'd like to see some improved reporting on usage. 

We have been using Confluence for more than five years.

Confluence is stable. 

Confluence is scalable. Our company has 1,000 employees, and we're growing. It has kept pace with our growth. 

I rate Confluence eight out of 10. I won't rate it nine because my company didn't develop it. If my company had developed it, it would be much better. 

I use Atlassian Confluence for all kinds of documentation purposes, such as sharing information about specifications among the group and distributing those documents for review remarks from others. It's a nice way of distributing information between different teams.

Atlassian Confluence's most valuable features are the ease in which you can use the tool, the flexibility in creating folder structures, receiving notifications in case others put remarks on the documents, and working together on documents.

Atlassian Confluence could improve how information is shared outside our company. We had some negative experiences with the rights we have with our information when sharing it within Atlassian Confluence and with other teams outside the company. It's due to the limitations on the rights we have on the export capabilities. We don't have sufficient rights to do so.

In an upcoming release, there should be improvements in the graphical support for drawings. We have some plugins, but it's limited for making drawings within Atlassian Confluence, it's rather difficult. Most of the time we create I create drawings outside Atlassian Confluence and import them as a file. It makes it a bit difficult to update drawings within the solution itself, but it's mostly limited to the plugin support we have internally.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for approximately five years.

Atlassian Confluence is a highly stable solution. We receive notifications from the vendor if there is maintenance work that is required. The overall stability is good.

The scalability of Atlassian Confluence is very good when I see how many people are using it. There could be up to 1,000 users using the solution. 

I have not needed to use the support from Atlassian Confluence.

The initial setup of Atlassian Confluence is straightforward. It's set up within the company and we ask to create workspaces for ourselves.

We have a site license for Atlassian Confluence and there are some limitations on external users.

I would recommend others to use these solutions. The ease of use and the very short learning curve, make it an ideal tool.

I rate Atlassian Confluence an eight out of ten.

The solution is very simple to collaborate among a large group of people. If you want to create a bit more compelling, nice-looking documents, then it's not ideal, but for the thing we are using it for, it's perfect.