Jira Reviews

ira is a very complete tool in the tech industry, helping in deploying software. Jira is a very strong tool for a corporation with a team to track and monitor all the tasks that have been defined within a project. It helps teams work and collaborate faster to improve performance. 

I think one of the most powerful features in Jira is the customization of fields and workflow. Jira helps in projects consisting of a workflow by providing templates with the return workflow, we can even modify the workflow and the fields. 

I think the GIS can seem too complex for some people because there are a lot of structures in the software itself. Users need to understand how Jira works, how to define Apex, how to use the storage and many other things. Each template provided by Jira has a different functionality, so users need to explore further about the functions of Jira, especially for the setting and configuration factors. There might be users out there who are unaware of the features in Jira. Otherwise, users will be confused about how to use this tool as it's very complex. 

The product is stable, and in terms of performance, it's really fast. The support team from Jira always informs users in advance, for example, if there is any scheduled maintenance or anything related to the performance tab. I believe Jira also creates maintenance schedules by considering the non-productive hours for each country. Hub fixes and new feature addition time are also planned by Jira for users. 

Jira has a great Knowledge Center, for any kind of questions about how to use the product or other FAQs. Users can check the Knowledge Center before raising a ticket to Jira support. But for some cases, if someone creates a ticket, Jira support is very proactive and follows up on every ticket to provide a solution. Thus, support from Jira is great. I would rate customer support a nine out of ten. 

Previously before using Jira, we were using Google Workspace because it also has collaborative features. But I think it was missing a lot of features compared to Jira. Jira is specifically created for product or software development, so it's suitable for our business product. Jira has also gone through a lot of improvements over the years since we are using it. 

Not much time is needed to install or configure this tool. You just need to register and subscribe before the tool is ready to use.  

I would rate this product an eight out of ten. 

We are using Jira to plan and manage projects, including tasks, sprints, and releases.

It allows teams to create, assign, and track issues. It supports various agile methodologies like Scrum and Kanban, providing tools for backlog management, sprint planning, and burndown charts. 

It offers robust reporting capabilities, allowing teams to track progress, monitor team performance, and generate visual reports.

Jira's user-specific dashboards and reporting capabilities provided insights into individual and team performance. This promoted accountability and allowed our development team to recognize and reward high-performing team members.

Jira's collaborative features, such as comments, notifications, and real-time updates, facilitate better communication. Teams can discuss tasks, provide feedback, and track progress in one centralized platform, leading to smoother workflows. 

Tracking bugs, feature requests, and development tasks was cumbersome. It was difficult to prioritize and assign issues, leading to delays in issue resolution. With Jira's issue-tracking capabilities, we can create customizable workflows. This enables users to capture, categorize, and assign issues with ease. As a result, the development team can address issues promptly, improving product quality.

Jira's native support for agile practices, including Scrum and Kanban boards, allowed our development team to embrace agile methodologies seamlessly. This enabled them to prioritize features, plan sprints, and adapt to evolving client needs more effectively.            

Jira's user-specific dashboards and reporting capabilities provided insights into individual and team performance. This promoted accountability and allowed our development team to recognize and reward high-performing team members.

Jira required a significant amount of system resources, particularly for larger organizations with extensive workflows and numerous projects.                            

The high level of customization and feature-rich nature of Jira are confusing for new users, requiring some time to learn and navigate.

Administering Jira, especially in large organizations with complex workflows, can be challenging and may require expertise.

I have been using Jira for issue tracking and task management for the last seven years.

We did not previously use a different solution.

Jira is used for all the project management, on all the stages of project management. So then we create a Kanban board and move on to creating the stories.

We create the story points, break down the requirements, and then create the Sprint accordingly. Based on that, we can manage in Jira how many user stories we will pick in what Sprint. And based on the dependencies of the user stories, this is the flexibility that Jira provides. Then we have also got various, you know, sub-tasks, which we have to complete to accomplish the DoD (Definition of Done). We can mark the Sprint as complete when these particular tasks are completed. So that gives very good monitoring of the project where the project is

going on.

When it comes to the testing part, so testing is end-to-end on Jira. We can take the user stories based on the acceptance criteria. The test cases are created in Jira, and the business analyst team reviews those test cases. Based on their feedback, the test cases are updated. Those test cases are being executed. So there is clear tracking of the test execution, and all the test cases are also linked with the user storage. We have end-to-end tracking of what test case is executed for what user story. So that is the best part of Jira.

The monitoring, flexibility and tracking are really good in Jira.

When we use the plugin in Jira so, there are two different systems which we are working on, Jira and the X-ray plugin. The X-ray plugin should be incorporated into Jira because we have to fetch two reports. One report is faxed through Jira, and one can be faxed through X-ray. So there needs to be clarity about which the Jira team should reflect.

I have been using Jira for eight years. 

Jira is a stable product. I have seen the growth in the solution’s stability for the last eight years. The current version is quite stable and is a robust system.

Overall, the solution is scalable. Jira is quite easy to scale. If we have five projects working on Jira and we have about five more projects to be incorporated, it's easy to install Jira for those five projects as well. Presently, twenty five thousand users are using Jira. 

We have been using this for the last eight years and we are quite accustomed to that. We don’t need much support from Jira or Atlassian. Yes, but we have got an enterprise version of that, and their support is quite quick.

Positive

I was using HPE Quality Management Tool.

The initial setup of Jira is very easy. I have been an administrator, so I would say that because used to it. But in comparison to other systems, yeah, it’s quite easy and user-friendly. The deployment takes two to three days of time. Forty people are required for the maintenance of the solution.

I implemented it myself as an administrator of Jira.

Compared to the value Jira provides, it’s not that expensive. It has an yearly licensing cost.

Use all the reports which are generated. You have to make a system for the process. Here is a small example during a subtask. The time input via the source is not mandatory. But you have to make it mandatory either from the back end.

You’ll not be able to fetch the reports on the performance, the health of the project, capacity management, or IT management if the data is not input properly. So this is something which people most people don’t take care of as a Jira planning. But when you plan a project, you have to plan these things.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

We are using the product for general task management, largely. From a software development community perspective, obviously, we use the task management piece - the foundation to what leads into the development and the CI/CD pipelines and et cetera. Outside of that, it varies widely. At its very core, it's task management, however, then it's used by various functional areas within the company. For example, we have contracting and procurement that utilize it. And we have marketing that uses it and security, IT security, audit, compliance. Various functional areas across the company use Jira. We use it a lot. More and more business teams are using it today than were previously.

We also use it for reporting. With task management comes the Jira out-of-the-box reporting. We had Advanced Roadmaps before it was included in the product. And now that it's just rolled into the Data Center product, you obviously don't have to pay for it specifically anymore, however, that's the most scaled reporting that we have. Then, as far as any other apps are concerned, we really just use time and status for measuring continuous flow and have more of a Kanban approach. Of course, some workflow, add-ons, and things of that nature to add some value such as training for Jira.

I'm less concerned about marketplace apps due to the fact that, whether you go to Azure DevOps or Microsoft, or whether you go to Atlassian, there are countless apps out there that will extend the application itself. 

It's an organized, collaborative, transparent way of working and that's really helped the organization overall. Otherwise, many teams would still be managing work in Excel spreadsheets and/or SharePoint, which is just ridiculous. At least this provides some sort of structured approach that can easily be queried and have data extracted. I use Jira for everything at work. I don't even use email that much. It's through @mentions and all these different things. 

The solution is great for helping teams to collaborate.

There are tons of apps and add-ons for the solution that help you expand its offering via third parties.

The product allows you to become very structured in your approach to work.

You no longer need to email people. You can mention them right in Jira and have conversations there. 

It's easy to extract data and do queries.

The way that Azure DevOps rolled out their boards and made them flexible is something that Jira lacks. You want a workflow and you're configuring your columns and you're mapping status to columns, however, in Jira, you can't have more columns than you do status. Whereas in Azure DevOps from a Jira admin perspective, it's amazing as it doesn't care what you need in terms of what your life cycle is. The underlying process template is very generic. It's just like a to-do, in progress, done ordering basically, except they use the words inprog or active, resolved, and a couple of others. Open, active, resolved, and maybe one more.

No matter what they do to the face of the board, they can create 15 columns if that's what they want to represent their lifecycle, which gives them that visibility and the ability to then report on that. The reports will run off of that, however, they never have to actually reach out to an admin and say, "I need you to build me a workflow." On the admin side of Azure DevOps, they could modify the underlying process template to include things like that would be the equivalent. They refer to them as rules in Azure DevOps, however, it would be the equivalent of post functions and validators and these things within Jira.

The great majority of teams don't care about that. What they care about is just being able to properly represent their lifecycle. It provides a great deal of flexibility and it cuts down a tremendous amount on admin having to build a workflow for each and every team that feels that their process is somehow different than everybody else's. It lets them basically self-organize. Agility, being able to just boom, build out their workflow as they see fit. That's the biggest thing that I've seen so far that Jira could really learn from.

In Jira, say on the team, no matter the methodology, it doesn't matter what I'm practicing, if I am using the tool for a while and I've compiled some sort of history. If I want to change my workflow, say my team is today using to-do in progress done, and tomorrow, I decide I want to use to-do in review and done, and I apply that new workflow, I have just now effectively lost all of my histories in terms of reporting. Now the issues themselves, of course, the activity, the history, all of it is still there, but you lose all your boards. Not the boards per se, but the reporting within them. That includes all of my past sprint burndowns, all my past velocity reports, some of that stuff gets completely wiped away. The only way to restore it is to replace the original workflow. It's insane. It's the way that the application is built and it's all tied in with it. I had it explained to me one time by Atlassian, however, it's just really a bad thing - especially when you're in a large enterprise organization and then you get somebody like me that comes around that they hire to come in and be the product manager. The first thing I say is, "We need some fricking governance. You can't have 100 plus statuses. What the hell is this? Or 500 custom fields that half the people aren't even using."

The statuses in the workflow standardization become virtually impossible as I can say, "Hey. This workflow that you're using is a terrible workflow. Let me fix it for you. Let me give you a better workflow. Let's talk about this. Let's build a really good workflow." We need to go through that pain and then I have to tell them that, "Oh, and by the way though, if you adopt this new workflow that I'm sitting here telling you it's going to be so much better, be advised that you're going to lose all your reporting history." How do you think that's going to go? Probably not so good. That is a huge downfall. 

I'm an avid user of Jira and I've been using the product for at least a decade. At my company, I'm the product manager, however, I'm also the Jira admin support desk, and I wear all the hats for 4,000 plus users. Therefore, I'm very familiar with Jira. 

I'm learning Azure DevOps as well, mostly due to the fact that I'm being forced to. The company is adopting Azure DevOps. I'm fighting to keep Jira around. It still has the value that it adds to the company. The business side of our company is largely embedded in the tool. 

The stability is excellent. I've never had any issues. If anything, it's probably one of our more stable products.

I have found it difficult to scale. With the Advanced Roadmaps, we do have the ability to add additional layers of hierarchy. However, that's been a struggle at our organization as we're trying to adopt a Scaled Agile Framework. Unfortunately, with the Advanced Roadmaps for Jira, the hierarchy is very inflexible, which I've actually opened up a ticket with Atlassian on. 

With the Scaled Agile Framework, you need to be able to move from the program - what was once called referred to as the program layer - and you may have a large solution layer, or you may not. If you don't, you go directly to the portfolio layer. That said, in Advanced Roadmaps, it's very inflexible. You can't skip a level if you want to. You have to go through this regimented hierarchy, which does not bode well for a Scaled Agile Framework environment. I've never been able to crack the code on how to get around that.

Also, the reporting in Jira seems to be very team-oriented. Yes, you can create boards and things using queries and combine items, however, I find it difficult to scale without an additional app or plugin. For example, if you've got a program and you've got a bunch of teams that are supporting said program, I find it difficult to be able to scale and show a program increment, a PI. That level of reporting is lacking. I know that there are apps out there for that. However, unless you're willing to spend a small fortune on a lot of apps, well, the core product doesn't scale above that of the team level.

The solution is extensively used in the company, and we are quite sizeable. We have about just under 4,000 active users. It used to be used it was 5,000 and then COVID hit and we lost a lot of contractors that were cut when COVID hit. It's that mostly and then some of the users are being siphoned out of the Atlassian tool stack now into Azure DevOps.

99% of the technical support staff have been awesome. We actually have premier support. They seem to be very responsive and very helpful. Where I personally get frustrated is if there are issues and we give feedback and advice, and they respond with a "thank you, however, we aren't changing". They will tell us it's not a priority for them right now, and it can be frustrating. 

There's a lot of different things out there that people feel that should be included as basic functionality within the application. Maybe some of those I agree with, some of them maybe not. However, when I see something that I consider a bug and then they tell me that, "Yeah, that's not a priority right now." I find that very frustrating. Just now, I was trying to configure the application for the ability to create or comment on issues by setting up a mail server. And there's a known bug. I don't know if they consider it a bug. However, when you configure that and somebody actually does reply to a system-generated email notification, it will add it as a comment, which is great, yet it will also automatically attach your profile picture to that issue.

Therefore, as many times as you comment or reply via an email is exactly how many times an attachment will be added to your issue, which obviously is ridiculous. That cannot be purposely designed that way. Who wants attachments of your own face added to an issue? And it just takes up space needlessly. Their response to me was, "Well, that's just not a priority right now." Basically, not enough people have complained about it yet and they must not be using that functionality, therefore they're not worried about it.

I wasn't at the company when they originally set this solution up. There are certainly some things that I would do differently in hindsight, however, I wasn't here when they set it up originally and can't speak to what the process was like.

Pricing information you can just get right off the internet. Atlassian is notorious for not negotiating. They have never negotiated up until very recently. They've started to negotiate contracts as they're really trying to push the cloud. They're trying to get people to move to the cloud. In some cases, they are willing to negotiate costs if you're willing to move to the cloud. Not only costs. Terms. They treat everybody equally, which honestly, I respect.

However, large enterprise organizations like the one I work for, hate it. They hate that as they feel like they have some sort of clout or they need to be able to throw their weight around a little bit and they needed to be treated specially. One of the biggest things that hurt Atlassian is its unwillingness to work directly with large enterprise organizations. It works well with smaller companies, however, their approach to large enterprise organizations really hurts them. The Microsofts of the world will send you a whole crew of people that will come in and do demos and meet with your senior executives. Atlassian has that in the equivalent of a TAM, technical account manager. 99% of the time if you call Atlassian, they'll say, "Whoa. You work with one of our third-party vendors." Which, okay, there's a ton of third-party vendors that are fantastic I'm sure, however, people want to see Atlassian. When you get into a larger enterprise organization, they don't appreciate the fact that an Atlassian representative can't come in and take the time to meet with people and do these things when they're spending that kind of money. It doesn't bode well. They really don't like it.

That's largely why they're being pushed out of Jira and onto other solutions. Microsoft, for example, has invested time and energy. Microsoft has also negotiated terms and pricing. Large companies would rather have a relationship with a company like that than a company that doesn't negotiate or come to see you.

I've started to look at Azure DevOps. I am personally the Jira product manager, and what I'm trying to do is have some sort of comparison. It all became very sudden. I was recently asked if, by the end of the week, I could provide a recommendation as to when one team should use Azure DevOps versus when one team should use Jira. I was told to look into why we should use one over the other or if they are so similar that it doesn't matter and we could just get rid of Jira. I've done very little research so far,

Obviously, Microsoft and Atlassian are competitors. Back when Azure DevOps was TFS, it wasn't even a close comparison in terms of boards. Jira blew TFS out of the water. It wasn't even remotely close. Well, then they obviously knew that they needed to improve and they basically made freaking boards look like Jira's boards and made some improvements on top of it in some ways. I suspect that there may be some underlying limitations with DevOps. I know that in Jira you could allow teams to just create the workflows that they want within reason, of course, while pulling from a series of predefined statuses and these things. Whereas, I don't know that you can do that in Azure DevOps. But then again, I don't know that it's necessary since you can already create the boards the way you want to.

I know that some people so far from customer feedback, tend to like the dashboards more in Azure DevOps. They seem to like the reporting options. They find it easier and more intuitive to use, however, I don't really know anything more about it than that. I just need to really know the pros and cons of each of these things. Here's what's surprising to me, if I'm at Atlassian or if I'm Azure DevOps or Microsoft, you would think that they would have something like that. You would think they'd be going, "Who is my biggest competitor? Well, I need to know these things so that I can improve my product and compete with him." However, when I reach out to them, I don't have any real comparison to work off of.

I did find one article online that was written by Atlassian and Azure DevOps versus Jira, however, it wasn't well-written.

We're just customers and end-users.

I upgraded the application back in December, so we're on 8.13 right now. While we're currently on-premises, one of the things that were on my to-do this year was to consider moving to the cloud, which is something that we are very interested in doing.

Currently, we're using the Jira Data Center.

Our company has barely scratched the surface of the power of Jira in my personal opinion as they've just largely tried to do a bunch of customization. There was no governance set when I first joined the organization. People were just allowed to create whatever they wanted in any way they wanted, and it needed to be cleaned up, which doesn't help my efforts of course. 

There might, in the near future, be many people who get siphoned off of Jira as the company already made a decision that Bamboo and Bitbucket are going. They're moving all the software development activities into Azure DevOps. We already know that. That's already been decided. Atlassian doesn't know that, however, it's happening. The process is probably going to take a year, maybe two. We haven't really rolled it out yet or defined or planned it out. That said, it will happen. Whether or not Jira sticks around though, we don't know yet. I'm hoping it will as I love using it.

I'd advise new companies that one of the biggest things to do at the outset is to just put some governance in place before you go rolling out. It's a super-powerful application. However, if you are in a large enterprise organization, you need to establish an advisory board before you go rolling this thing out. Really think about a steering committee. How are you going to handle requests for customization? What will the board handle? What will the board not handle? Or the committee, whatever you want to refer to it as. They obviously did not do that here when they rolled this out. It can be a really great thing if you have that in place. It's not overly cumbersome.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We use Jira as a communication tool for tasks and epics. Everything is in one place in the ticket, and it's helpful to communicate with the team. We don't have to use Slack and other platforms to track information related to tasks.

The most useful features are the Kanban dashboard, the ability to create tasks, bugs, epics with child issues, time estimation, and Jira reports. The dashboard helps in tracking tasks and projects easily. Time estimation is crucial for my team to estimate tasks accurately, and the monthly reports are helpful for monitoring progress. We can see everything in one place, which improves communication within the team.

Sometimes it's hard to set up the dashboard for the team lead. For example, I can see tasks selected for development but not UAT tasks. It would be beneficial if the setup was easier. I understand Jira is a comprehensive tool, but dashboard setup could be made more user-friendly.

We've been using this solution for about two years already.

The stability of Jira is good. I have faced issues only once. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Jira is pretty stable and scalable. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it nine for scalability.

I haven't contacted customer support yet.

Positive

My company also uses Azure DevOps dashboard. I prefer Jira because its interface is simpler and easier to use than Azure.

I am just a user of Jira. The dashboard setup is done by our team lead, so I'm not sure how to set up Jira.

The price is regular for this kind of tool. However, my company hasn't bought Confluence integration because of the price. We are fine with Jira, but would like to have integrations if it becomes cheaper.

Feel free to try it, and you will love it. The biggest advantage is that you can see all of the project in one place on the dashboard, track your estimation and time, and see your progress. I rate Jira nine out of ten.

We maintain all space-related information in Jira. We track all stories and add tasks to identify specific services. We pull the relevant functions onto the screen. We follow a two-week sprint cycle, completing sprints accordingly. We proceed to make a release. We conduct testing activities, whether manual or automated. If bugs are identified, we fix them. The customer story remains in the loop until we move to the release cycle. Upon release, developers can automatically deploy the code. After deployment, we proceed with user acceptance testing and move to the front end.

Everything is tracked in one place.

There could be an improvement in loading files and images for more than 50 MB. It would be good if it allowed more than 100 MB.

Additionally, Jira analytics needs further development to analyze code, but we should keep the queries. This will allow us to delve into the details of completed tasks, work in progress, and pending items. However, more information regarding graphical representation is still required. Considering the number of test cases, it's crucial to have comprehensive data on completion status, logs, and retesting. Jira excels in providing such detailed information.

I have been using Jira for 6 years.

The product is stable.

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

The solution’s scalability is good.

55 users are using this solution every day.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

We receive technical support. Some challenges may arise, particularly in labels, but we receive assistance.

Positive

I have used ALM before. It has high pricing, considering the maintenance and shipping costs. Although the features are new, if we compare them to Jira, ALM still lags.

The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

A third-party vendor handles deployment. They will automatically execute the small instructions. Based on that, they will create a charge code, seek approval from management, and then proceed to deploy the particular feature. While auto-deployment is happening, we'll validate it once it's done. If everything is good, we'll release it. If there are any challenges, we'll roll it back.

The product is cheap.

I rate the product’s pricing one out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

Jira is easy to use and maintain; everything is in one place. Minimal maintenance is also required. 

We have our developers to maintain Jira. They will develop whatever we require for labels and provide them to us.

If you want to inform me about the adaptations for scaling Jira, it will be convenient to use Jira, but most of the reports will be easy to generate. We integrate with Git, making the process a bit easier.

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

We use it for requirements gathering. We raise our tickets; it takes tickets in the engine. We also use it for bug tracking and integrate it with the X-ray for testing.

Jira is a one-stop solution for all the requirements of an Agile project, including SSL. It's easy to use, and it also offers excellent notifications.

Jira has integrations with almost all other build management and alerting tools, both open-source and licensed ones. There are limitations to its data.

It lacks features to cover all testing aspects, so we often integrate it with other plugins or tools like X-ray. It would be beneficial if Jira included modules covering testing elements such as test planning, mapping test cases to requirements for traceability, tracking execution status, and managing different branches before release. Since Jira lacks robust support in these areas, we rely on additional tools like X-ray, which can be integrated with Jira. If Jira could incorporate these features internally, our processes would be streamlined.

I have been using Jira for 5 years. We are using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

Around 100 users are using this solution. It is scalable too.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

Customer support is good.

Positive

Jira is not difficult to install. We have an IT help desk team to take care of admin configurations, installations, etc. Everything is managed by different teams.

There are roughly around 50 people for deployments or maintenance overall.

The product is moderate and has a yearly subscription.

I rate the product's pricing a five or six out of ten.

I have used some other test management tools, such as ALM. If it is a full model, it'll be too difficult to manage in Jira, but for Azure projects, Jira is the best. It depends also on the needs of the project.

My advice would be to consider having a Jira license. There's a level of customization available, along with flexibility in pricing plans, so you can tailor your request according to your needs. This allows us to access features that align directly with our requirements.

Jira has integration capabilities with almost all build management and alerting tools. It offers seamless integration with both open-source solutions and licensed ones.

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

My company uses the product for the user storage it provides. The tool is also useful for requirements management and test management processes. The product is also useful to track the hours people in the company have spent on testing and test logging.

The solution's most valuable features revolve around the dashboard view, which has a burndown chart indicating progress. I also like the tool's ability to provide details phase-wise, allowing users to see how many tickets are in development and how many are in the testing process. It also helps users see how many tickets are ready to move to the production phase. The aforementioned areas of the tool are pretty frequently used.

Some of the customizations are definitely a little challenging. I depend on Zephyr to manage certain reporting aspects and deal with the challenges of customization. More than a thousand records are something that our company cannot retrieve, but with the administrator's permission, the limit can be increased. Some of the functionalities to increase the limit of retrieval, in case there are more than a thousand records, could have been included as a default feature since it would be helpful if I wanted to do some analysis or if I wanted to extract all the details when my limit is only a thousand records and then I have to search for another way to find and extract the details. If the aforementioned details of the issues in the product are addressed, then it would be great.

If there is a provision to increase the number of records retrieved, it would be really helpful. In the tool, only a predefined reporting is there, and it helps with some of the more customized reporting, like Power BI Report Builder, so the area of reporting can be enhanced and it can be really helpful.

I have been using Jira for two years. I am a user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The product is always up and running in my company, and we have not experienced too much downtime in Jira, making it a very efficient tool.

More than 50 people use the product in my company.

I haven't had the opportunity to interact much with the product's technical support, but based on the inputs from the other members of my team, I can say that my company was able to get support from Jira whenever required. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was not very complex, as it is manageable.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Compared with Jira, I feel Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects (ADO) is coming up pretty fast in the market since the features attached to the paid version work well. Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects (ADO) can easily integrate with other Microsoft products without needing any customization. Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects (ADO) is growing pretty fast in the market.

My company uses the product for planning tasks.

The product has played a major role in helping my company in the area of bug tracking. During the testing phases, be it SIT or UAT testing, if there were any issues, our company used to log the bug using Jira, and then we connect with the respective users, so we have a track of which particular bug and check to see if the bug is related to which user storage.

Jira helped our company's project management, analytics, and reporting parts. If you look at the analytical part, my company used to get the hours we have availed each of the user storage. When it comes to the user storage part, my company would like to see whether the hours we consumed were optimal or if it was over-consumed, which is information that we track with Jira. The tool is useful for tracking progress and seeing where my company stands when it comes to tickets. Each ticket might have a certain due date, which the company gets to see using Jira. Altogether, the tool helps users eventually understand the team's progress, the current sprint details, and how much of the team's capacity has been used. With Jira, my company gets to see the aforementioned details, so we were able to track it with the product's dashboard.

I am not used to using the product's integration capabilities with other solutions.

The product's user interface is good.

I recommend the product to others who plan to use it.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.