Atlassian Confluence Reviews

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. 

We use Atlassian Confluence for project documentation. It works as a repository of documents. We can write documents, including tutorial information, technical manuals, and other company procedures.

The product has a valuable feature for quick verification of documents.

There could be an option to collaborate with other users while editing the documents. We have to wait for other users to edit and release the document to make further changes or updates.

We have been using Atlassian Confluence for one and a half years.

The product is very stable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

We have 125 Atlassian Confluence users in our organization. We use the tool every day. I rate its scalability a seven out of ten. The lack of a collaboration feature affects the scalability level.

I have used SharePoint before.

I rate Atlassian Confluence a six out of ten. I advise others to look for other tools if they want a feature for collaboration.

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 use Confluence to organize my data. In the case of Confluence, I use it to handle various transactions in the bank. We have multiple channels in the bank. The bank I work for is one of the largest in Brazil.

I manage five different channels in the bank. I receive messages, put them in a pipeline, and then process the data in various ways. After that, I distribute the processed data through different channels. I also have other tasks related to client management.

For example, I have to connect my legacy systems with new solutions, and Confluence helps me with that. I use different connectors to transfer data from legacy systems to new core solutions.

For me, the most valuable feature is its high performance. It's crucial for us in the bank, as we handle a massive number of transactions every day. It's very efficient and saves a lot of time.

Additionally, the ease of use and the availability of different connectors are important. They help me connect with various databases and facilitate integrations with different solutions.

I have a couple of different pipelines that I work with. However, I'd like to see them displayed differently on the same dashboard. So, I would like to have a unified dashboard to view the different pipelines.

In my case, the governance aspect is the most important. It doesn't work well with a huge company, and it's not as effective as it could be for software developers.

Moreover, there is an area of improvement in the governance functionality within Confluence, especially for large companies like ours, to have a more sophisticated governance solution associated with Confluence.

I have been using it for six months. I am using both Confluence SaaS solutions. I have access to various versions of the software.

It is very stable solution. 

I would rate the scalability high. 

The customer service and support team was not so good. In Brazil, the technical support for Confluence is not very good because the team is small. We are still trying to improve, but there are a lot of open permissions on the internet. However, Confluence is a very important tool and has good features. So, it's important to have better support because it can make it easier for users to work with Confluence. Currently, it's not as close as other brands, which makes it hard to propose new ideas or get prompt assistance. There are a lot of opportunities to make it more user-friendly.

The initial setup was complex.

In my opinion, it's worth the investment. I saw an ROI in a short time.

The pricing is good. In my opinion, there are no better alternatives.

I would definitely recommend using this solution. Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use the database for documentation and requirement gathering. So, we document those and create plans or backlogs.

I have actually not used the solution much. I have only used the solution to create pages, and I also used it to document certain requirements.

The interface is good. Usability-wise, the solution is not great. However, I can adjust, and I can work on it.

The solution's user experience needs to be improved. The solution is not very user-friendly. From my perspective, it should be more user-friendly.

In the future, the solution should be able to integrate with other tools. I think it is integrated only with Jira. But there are other tools with which it could also be integrated. We should be able to integrate this tool to get a trace of what information we are gathering. Maybe it is only possible for Jira because it is a Jira product.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for around a year.

The solution's stability is fine. It automatically saves the data. We don't lose any data even if we don't save it manually. So that way, if something happens to the system, it drops and shuts down, and the data is automatically saved. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

I didn't face any issues with the scalability. It was very good. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

I have not contacted customer support yet as I have not experienced any issues with the solution. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I don't have any experience with other products. I have used Azure DevOps, but I have not used too many products in this category other than Confluence.

The initial setup was straightforward and not too complex. I rate the setup a seven out of ten. I think the solution was previously deployed on-prem, but now, I think it is on the cloud. I also do not have an idea of how long it took to deploy Atlassian Confluence, as it was done by the backend team and not us.

I don't have an idea about pricing. But I can say that I think it's a good tool for requirement gathering, where you can create backlogs and store or document the data.

The solution may need a web build access code so that it can be used from anywhere. So, once you have access, you can access it from anywhere. And the scalability is also good. So, I can rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

The business analysts use Atlassian Confluence for project documentation and use case stories. I use it primarily for dashboards and KPIs that are set for programs. Most people are comfortable using Atlassian Confluence.

This solution should have customized dashboards that could be built by the user and connect to the data and filtering mechanisms to create dashboards. It will be great for any C-level executive to monitor their KPIs rather than depend on somebody else to create them. So, the dashboards should be improved.

I have been using this solution for about ten years. It is mainly deployed on cloud.

We don't have any issues with stability. We have about 200 users of Atlassian Confluence.

We don't have any experience with technical support.

We have used Zoho, Salesforce, Bamboo and Trello. They almost all work the same because I've seen things done differently. Whether you do project management or documentation, you can choose a solution that's friendly for developers and easy to understand and pick up quickly. I would not say one is better than the other, and each solution has its abilities. Atlassian Confluence seems stable, and we don't have a problem. When dealing with compliance, some of our projects need people and PCI nest compliance, so we also have to look at tools hosted in the manner in which they comply with these standards. IBM products meet some of those requirements.

All things in Atlassian Confluence are set up on cloud. The clients have their administration teams, and they extend an account for our developers, our PAs, and our managers on these platforms. So we don't set up anything. The administration team sets up the Jira accounts on cloud. GitLab and GitHub are set up on-premises while keeping the code version internally. Setup is not a major issue because most of these things are very simple, and you have instructions.

I rate the price an eight out of ten, with ten being a good price and one being a high price. Pricing is not a problem, and you might have other products with lower rates. For bigger companies, price is not a problem because there is always a budget, and the clients fund it. However, if the price gets cheaper, it will be better for users.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten.

My primary use case is for documentation.

The most valuable feature is the accessibility from different sites for different colleagues and the search option. 

I would like to see the text editor upgraded from its current limited abilities.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for the past ten years.

When it comes to stability I have not seen the solution go down in the past couple of years so it is good.

When it comes to scalability you can add as many documents and sites as you like. We currently have around two thousand users 

I can recommend Atlassian Confluence for any company that requires document management and documenting ongoing processes, Of course, it is not a very intuitive or very comprehensive management tool because you cannot track the requirement object changes with it, but you can use it for general documentation purposes. I would rate Atlassian Confluence 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 use this solution for documentation purposes. It's very tightly integrated with Jira, so we handle project management with Jira and document management with Confluence.

We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket. The way both work together helps us to reduce the duplication of the codes, and if we need to have documentation, we describe it in Confluence and tag the page in the Jira ticket for someone to work on, which reduces the duplication of work.

On each page, we can see the different version updates that have already been done by colleagues. It's auditable, which helps us to figure out what changes have been done at what point. Documentation with an auditing capability helps us to manage the overall documentation effectively.

Nowadays, the standard for documentation for developers is mostly in Markdown, so pretty much everything we can do is in the Markdown language. The support for Confluence to import something that's in Markdown is not that great. Sometimes it's also not that great when it comes to including code snippets or similar things, so I think the couple of improvement areas would be around Markdown support and support for adding code.

As for added features, I would like to see more flexibility in the way we can design a workflow in Confluence, and maybe some templates that we can use based on the purpose of the document. 

I would also like to see more integration with other common application services. Other than draw.io, there is not much integration to other services like Lucidchart or similar services, which are helpful for reporting your documentation with drawings and architecture diagrams. Those improvements would make it a bit more user-friendly.

I have been using this solution for five years now. 

The stability partly depends upon the resources that you allocate for the solution, but it's pretty much been stable for the last couple of years that I've been working with it.

The solution is scalable and it's centrally controlled, and we have a couple of central responsibility roles for adding new users. It's helpful for us on the backend because if we want to provide access to different sets of people, some may need edit access, some may need read-only access, and we utilize those different permissions.

Other than utilizing the public documentation that is available, I haven't reached out to the support team.

I was not very involved in the setup of Confluence, but my understanding is that it was not that difficult.

Confluence might be a burden to small and medium companies, like startups, so I probably would not recommend it to them, but I would definitely recommend it for companies at the enterprise level.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten because we found it helpful. It's good if you are in need of long-term documentation of projects, both on the functional side and the technical side, but at the same time, it needs some improvements, like more integration to other solutions. 

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.