We performed a comparison between Jira and Microsoft Project Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"We have around 2000 plus users, so scale wise, there are no issues. We can easily scale up with multiple users."
"The solution is easy to use and user-friendly."
"We use Jira mostly for task coordination and assignment. Additionally, scrum methodologies defined work items and bug issues. If we create any bugs all of them are fixed."
"The most valuable feature of Jira is the integration with all the different Atlassian tools. They all integrate very easily."
"The most valuable feature of Jira is the project package for development."
"A stable solution with no unplanned downtime."
"We integrate Jira with QRadar which is helpful."
"JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for."
"The technical support for Microsoft Project Server and the support is very good. Microsoft support is working very well."
"The solution scales well."
"Technical support is good."
"It's stable and reliable."
"The solution has easy integration with Excel."
"The solution is scalable and easy to expand."
"The most valuable features are the gantt charts. It's easy to use for me."
"The usability is excellent."
"The automation feature needs to be more user-friendly."
"If I'm comparing it to ALM Octane, the documentation is not as robust as ALM Octane's documentation. So, they can improve on the documentation side."
"It should be less expensive."
"Jira is a project management tracking tool, and it would be great to see integration with the source front or Azure DevOps, etc."
"An area for improvement in Jira is that it's not designed for test management. To use it for test management, you need an add-on or several add-ons, e.g. Xray or Zephyr."
"It is a bit harder for management or the business partners. I used to search the Atlassian Community online for some troubleshooting issues and I think there were some issues that seemed to not be a big problem for other similar applications, like Microsoft Teams, that were not considered by Jira."
"Of course, the price could always be cheaper."
"For our company, we're thinking about not only project management solutions but also collaboration solutions, and maybe if Jira had a chart or quick commenting option, it would be great."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"The check-in, check-out feature makes Microsoft Project Server pretty slow or cumbersome to use."
"The cost could be lower."
"Microsoft Project Server could improve by making the solution more user-friendly."
"The initial setup was complex."
"This solution could improve by adding integration with Primavera schedules to allow the reading and management of them."
"We are on the on-prem version. The cloud, however, gives more regular updates that we can take advantage of."
"We need to be able to compare milestones, calls, and other variables regarding the projects we are working on. I have to contract developers to make reports, which is where things get complicated. They need to develop personal and custom fields for us."
Jira is a powerful cloud- and subscription-based application lifecycle and issue management solution. It is designed to aid users both in project management and in resolving any issues that arise at any point in the software development process. It is especially concerned with easing the ability of developers to collaborate.
Some of the ways that organizations can benefit by choosing to deploy Jira include:
Real-time notification feature. Users can set Jira so that it offers them notifications that contain critical information in real time. It can send users email notifications when pressing issues have been updated. They can also set it to notify them about tasks that may be due, or other similar events.
Reviews from Real Users
Jira is a powerful solution that stands out when compared to many of its competitors. Two major advantages it offers are its workflow engine and its highly customizable dashboard.
Bharath R., the tool implementation and project management lead at a financial services firm, writes, “I feel the strongest feature of Jira is its workflow engine. It empowers us to automate our workflows within our organization. It's the one characteristic of Jira which I think can help any organization, be it in any domain.”
Uday J., a staff engineer at a computer company, says, “Another thing that I like a lot about Jira is that in the dashboard, you can plug the modules that you want. You can enable certain sections. For example, you can show trend history, open Jira tickets, etc. Some of the managers have created a dashboard for each engineer.”
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 143 reviews while Microsoft Project Server is ranked 7th in Project Portfolio Management with 17 reviews. Jira is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Project Server is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Jira writes "Great for collaboration, very stable, and extracting data is straightforward". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Project Server writes "Provides holistic reporting and allows us to keep track of what's going on with projects". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Micro Focus ALM Octane, IBM Rational DOORS, Polarion ALM and TFS, whereas Microsoft Project Server is most compared with Microsoft Project, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management, Broadcom Clarity PPM, Planisware and JIRA Portfolio. See our Jira vs. Microsoft Project Server report.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.