Atlassian Confluence Reviews

I appreciate:

• Web access.
• Collaboration.
• Export to PDF.

It has helped our organization as follows:

• Information is kept up to date.
• Accessible anywhere.
• Editable by everyone.
• Secure.
• Exportable.

I think that customization and text styling could be improved.

I have used it for 2.5 years.

I have not had any stability issues.

I have not had any scalability issues.

I would give them 8 out of 10. But first and second level support are email only!

We did not use a previous solution.

Initial setup with the cloud version is super easy but the server is only slightly more complex depending on your firewall, SSO, etc.

Licensing is in blocks of seats, so you need to decide what the maximum number of users might be before pricing it out. There is the option of anonymous users, which, while a security issue, does reduce the licensing cost.

We have evaluated MediaWiki, Kentico, SharePoint and WordPress.

• Definitely try before you buy to make sure it aligns with your expectation of what a collaboration system should be like.
• Post any and all questions to the Confluence forum (https://answers.atlassian.com/).
• Not all add-ons are available for Confluence Cloud, so customization is further limited.

It is easy and simple to implement. Some of the valuable features are its ability to customize via add-ons and the collaborative environment.

For many of my clients, we use Confluence as a shared collaborative knowledge management tool. It helps them as it is one repository for all the information and is easily searchable .

Rich text could always be better but it is nice to have.

I have used this product for two years.

We have not encountered any stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues, i.e., if you have enough IT resources.

I would give the technical support a 8/10 rating.

My customers were previously using a different solution. The reason they switched is because Confluence is a simple wiki-based solution, compared to the other wiki tools.

The setup was straightforward.

You should do it. It is so simple and can give so much added value rapidly.

The most valuable features are the collaboration and sharing of information.
The ability to crowdsource the gathering of information and have anyone edit and correct it instantly.

Quite simply, information is king. We have been able to share effectively and reduce our reliance on the usual Word docs and shared drives.

The WYSIWYG editor is great, but there are some problems with formatting. Tables and fonts are not always rendered correctly, especially when CCS is used to customize them. It is useful to understand Wiki Markup language to get around these problems.

The use of CSS can be a challenge, making customization difficult for new starters who have little experience of creating/editing CSS.

We have used this solution since the very early versions created in 2003 (or thereabouts).

There have been no major stability issues. There have been a few outages, but nothing which suggests that the product/version is inherently unstable.

I’m not aware of any scalability issues, but then I’m a “user” of the service and I no longer run an instance.

My questions have always been around the use of the product. It’s more effective to ask the community via the on-line forum, or to reach out via other websites. In most cases, a general search for answers via Google tends to provide answers.

I’ve played with MediaWiki, but not in detail and therefore I can’t compare it with Confluence.

I installed version 4 from scratch. That was very straightforward. I connected it to Postgres (PostgreSQL), and that was trouble free and straightforward.

I haven't had the need to install more recent versions or manage installations that service a large number of concurrent users.

This is a good product which beds itself into the enterprise very quickly. It soon becomes indispensable. It is worth getting a limited, license-free version first.

• Search: It is simple to search for documentation throughout Confluence from the search bar.
• Audit History: Collaboration is brilliant with a full audit history on the changes made by the users involved, as well as the ability to visually compare the differences.
• Simple Navigation: It is simple to create or edit a page with a similar look and feel to any word processor-type app.
• Templates: Used for standardizing and guiding users regarding what type of information should be captured within different spaces or page structures.
• Action Items: Makes it quick to set reminders for yourself or another user, with a due date for the required activity.

• It has improved collaboration, transparency, and documentation quality among teams.
• It has started us on the journey of knowledge management, not leaving valuable IP in peoples’ heads.
• It has enabled us to publish ubiquitous language and link standard definitions to words used in documents.
• It has enabled us to link templates to JIRA workflows in the management of our business processes.
• It has drastically improved the discipline around meetings and arising actions.

I would like to see the following improvements:

• When comparing page changes, you are only able to select 2 pages. While this is useful, it has proven to be a slight limitation when many people are editing a document. Having said this, we work around it by selecting the last “approved version” and the latest version. The downside is that we are unable to then see who made the change and when they made it without going to that specific history version are comparing it to the version just prior to it.
• Page approval: there is a feature whereby you are able to require page approval, but it can only be applied at a space level (with the ability to apply certain exclusions). The exclusion capability is not intuitive and therefore does not always work as expected. In addition, there is usually a specific parent and child set within a space that we would want to set approval requirements on. The approval plugin also keeps adding “Unapproved” blocks to the top of the page whenever an edit occurs. These continue to build up despite the fact that there has not been a status change (i.e. the page has not yet been approved, so one “Unapproved” block would be sufficient).

I have used Confluence for approximately three years.

We had an issue where the activity feed stopped working due to a locked cache file. This has not repeated itself.

We currently have approximately 200 users and have not experienced any difference in performance from when we had 10 users.

We haven’t used technical support.

Our previous solution was a combination of our file system, local hard drives, and an internally developed document management system.

We implemented Confluence because we needed a place to collaborate around software design and design specifications that was integrated with JIRA.

• Setup was fairly straightforward
• Some configuration is required to integrate with LDAP for authentication, if that is your chosen route
• Some configuration is required if you integrate with other Atlassian products
• The installation guide covers everything

Make use of the evaluation option if you are unsure. Another option is to start small and test whether Confluence is for you.

A 10-user license is only $10. Be aware of the costs if you plan on rolling it out to your organization, as it does start to add up.

Try to do license changes on your anniversary month, as there is no pro-rata benefit.

We didn’t evaluate alternatives. The implementation was driven by our Java development team and their requirement for a place to collaborate and plan development work.

Employ lean thinking and learn by doing! Have a rough idea of what you need to achieve and get a working framework in place. Experiment and see what works for you. It is simple to move pages after the fact, so don’t worry about being too pedantic in the beginning. Keep permissions simple and use groups as much as possible.

Overall, I love the ability to quickly upload and preview documents. The navigation is quite easy and intuitive once you grasp the file hierarchy. I use the template pages often to produce clean consistent spaces for clients.

It allows collaborative functionality across documents, meeting notes and project requirements.

I think the user interface could be more graphically pleasing, as well as establishing permissions across various spaces and user levels a bit clearer.

I have used this for approximately four years.

We have not had stability issues.

We didn’t have scaling issues once our company established its best use of the system and scaled from there.

We have not had to use them.

I used Basecamp previously. However, Confluence just fit our workflows better and at a better price.

Setup was very easy once the we established our goals in using the system.

Nothing more than the time spent previously using Basecamp.

Understand the permissions. We provide a login for clients with access to certain areas. With multiple clients ensuring data security, this was huge for us.

When we compared it to other wiki engines, we found the space concept and the hierarchical page.

• Space concept: The space concept was of interest to us since we have the need to filter information by means of authorization on different organizational groupings. For example, when working with loans, we can give access only to those working with loans.

• Hierarchical page: On another axis, there are documentation spaces. This could be a space for Java developers, for example. In this space, only those people working with framework are allowed to make updates. There is also another Java developer space where you “only” need to be a Java programmer to have authorization to update.

We use this tool in the following ways:

• Internally: In IT development, it acts as a support for different development areas with the documentation of tools, manuals, internal handbooks, and best practices.
• Externally: In business areas, it acts a place for the documentation of systems and FAQs.

We also exploit the SOAP API to make automated updates of specific wiki pages, such as z/OS. This is automated by means of a scheduler that triggers when some interesting event has occurred. I can also be trigged by Windows, which is a manual invocation.

The improvement is that this type of information is now found in one place instead of being found “here and there”.

I don't see the need for any large improvements. There are a number of minor improvements that are documented by Atlassian and also some problems waiting to be solved. For us, there are no items that we are sleepless waiting for.

We have been using Confluence since early 2007.

There are no stability issues to my knowledge.

There are no scalability issues to my knowledge. As of now, we run one instance in production and another instance in a test environment.

We had some issues regarding release upgrades, but they were sorted out as fast as could be expected.

We used an intranet based on another product before this solution, and we still use it. However, we never had a wiki engine before Confluence.

The initial installation was on UNIX with Oracle for data storage. I did not have any personal involvement with that installation. As a user, I can say that it worked OK.

As of now, we run it on Linux under Apache Tomcat and with Oracle. The move, which was done at the same time as a release upgrade, did not introduce any problems.

My personal installation experience was a private workstation test installation. It was done without any problems.

We looked at some other wiki engines like MediaWiki. However, the Confluence concept of spaces and hierarchy was the main reason why we chose it.

The product is easy to install and set up. It is also easy to work with as a user, an editor, or as a reader.

Some thought should go into the allocation of spaces and the usage. There are different “types” of spaces, such as documentation team. There is also the possibility to define our own types, which we haven't exploited yet.

In summary, define your use and read the documentation to see what needs to be defined in order to meet your demands.

The fact that Confluence is a wiki that allows near WYSIWYG editing. Having an “easy to use” product means that users have a “low threshold” to use it. This is very important, as the value of any information store is that of the data that is put in to it.

The ease of use makes it accessible for all users. Users are able to insert/edit information without having to have wiki knowledge. We can put any “static” information in Confluence. “Static” meaning that the information does not change on a daily basis. The strong search function let’s us find stored information rapidly.
We store customer information, work processes, to do’s, best practices, etc.

Some things like:

• Being able to (default) sort comments on pages with the last comment first.
• Being able to require “restricted access” permission to view Confluence pages (like JSD).
• The Atlassian cloud pricing model is pretty steep. Confluence should be accessible by a relatively large audience, but the pricing model prohibits this. For example, we like to grant our customers access.
• Inheritable permissions. This enables a “tree” of pages to share the same permissions. Currently, permissions can be set on a space, and altered per page. This is not very handy, as it is easy to forget setting permissions where it is needed or desired.

I have been using Confluence for five years.

We have not noticed any stability issues.

The pricing model is too steep for us to really use it for everything.

Technical support is generally very good. I must say though, that Atlassian’s success has made the company less flexible with respect to responding to users wishes and requirements. I have had several issues/demands that I found I was not alone in. On most occasions, there where one or more support issues in the Atlassian support portal and more and more, people complain about not being heard.

I have not used another solution before.

Having a cloud solution, setup is easy. Being somewhat of an expert from using Atlassian products for years, I know where to look. For novice users, I’ve been told that not everything is easy to find.

My advise to Atlassian is to offer a less steep model and also offer “read-only access” for non-paying users. We currently are looking for a second product to use in a situation where we need to offer access to 40-50 read-only customers.

I started using Confluence when we started with JIRA. Therefore, I did not evaluate other products.

Confluence Cloud is especially easy to get started with. With $10 a month for 10 users, it is pretty cheap. You have to keep in mind, however, that the pricing changes dramatically when the user count goes up. New users should think about what they may need later, when they start.

The valuable features are:

• It is easy to use.
• It is easy for newcomers to start using it.
• It has the “what you see is what you get” functionality of MS Word.
• It is easy to move pages around. There is no excuse for not doing documentation just because you do not know where to add it.
• It has good integration with JIRA. You can really do great things with the two products.

The license part is too flexible.

We have been using this solution since 2008.

There have not been any stability issues.

There have not been many scalability issues.

I would give technical support a rating of 9 out of 10.

We used SharePoint a long time ago, and we will never go back to it.

The installation can be quite complex. You need to know what you are doing in order to install it on your own. The cloud version is very easy to install.

You need to buy a full license for your entire organization, even though you only need a plugin for two people.

There needs to be an owner of the installation, in terms of the system and the infrastructure.