Atlassian Confluence Reviews

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.

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 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.

Our company is using Atlassian Confluence for all work related to documentation, calendars, notes, organization of processes, and workflows.

For example, if we have a new process, or we are updating a current process, we use Confluence Project and share it across the entire team. If we need to calendar a vacation, or an event, we use Confluence. The solution is also used to share best practices and release notes relating to the product.

The solution is valuable based on our company policy. It is easy to use. The interface is basic, with everything linkable. We also use JIRA, so Confluence can link any ticket or task from JIRA to be included on the Confluence page.

The way Atlassian Confluence handles tickets could be improved. This process should be easier, more flexible and more useable, such as the ease of creating a table. 

I have been working with Atlassian Confluence for two years.

The product is stable. 

Atlassian Confluence is a scalable tool. We use the solution across lots of teams, not only on-premise but through remote access. We currently have approximately 100 users in the organization. 

Anytime we need to update or add something, we reach out to our administration team. That team can contact the maintenance team for any attention required to fix and close the ticket in a short period of time.

The initial setup of Atlassian Confluence is straightforward. 

I would recommend Atlassian Confluence to anyone considering the implementation of the solution into their organization.

Overall, I would rate Confluence a seven out of 10.

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.

I primarily used this solution for IT documentation and documenting ISMS based on ISO 27001.

With the Confluence Wiki, I implemented quite a series of successful IT and Security Documentation projects. Confluence was my preferred product when starting any collaboration project that had to produce comprehensive, centrally organized, and highly usable documentation.

I worked on several projects that implemented an ISMS, based on the ISO 27001 standard, which mandates a "documented ISMS". I introduced Confluence as the tool to be used for that documentation.

I used Confluence as the "self-hosted" server in VMs or on MiniPCs running Linux. I always added backup methods, so the HA functionality of the much more expensive "datacenter-edition" was never needed. The largest environment I worked in had 100+ active authors, but typically I would work with the 10- or 25-user license, which are both quite affordable even for small customers and where the server resources are manageable (From two to four virtual cores and 4-16GB RAM will do fine).

This solution worked fine until Atlassian decided to force everybody into the cloud.

The most mentionable improvement is that documentation with Confluence gains a much better structure. Instead of hundreds of .doc and .xls files roaming the network shares and C: drives of team members, once you get Confluence set up, spend a few hours with all designated authors to define a few guidelines on how pages should look, be interlinked, and how to generally use the tool, the productiveness of creating and improving documentation is phenomenal!

The key is to take the mentioned few hours, get everybody together and produce a "style guide", for want of a better word, about how to use Confluence. Then agree on the top-level structure of your documentation and if everybody accepts this and uses it in their work, all is fine.

My recommendation is to meet for an hour every other week with those who work the most with the tool and fine-tune said "style guide" and the structure. This will help everybody to keep being motivated and to produce the best results. Also in such meetings, ideas about add-ons can be discussed and their integration planned.

Atlassian Confluence is a very good and seasoned Wiki Solution.

First and foremost, I want to mention its top-notch usability. It has a very intuitive user interface, which every user able to manage the basic functionality of a PC will be able to work with and produce quite satisfactory results.

There is a big and responsive community to help with questions and so far, Atlassian is still doing a good job to help.

Also, there are add-ons from various sources, which can be integrated with the product quite easily and have good chances to function together as a whole, like intended.

Another thing worth mentioning is the very good import and export functionality. You can just use Copy-Paste on a website or a document and Confluence will in most cases manage to reproduce the content quite recognizably. Export not only as XML, to be able to reimport, but also, PDF and Word DOCX work quite well. They can be further improved, speaking from personal experience with PDF files, by adding a few add-ons for formatting, page heading, and such.

Oh, and last but not least the flexibility should be mentioned. If for any reason there is the need to change the structure of the contents, say to move a branch of pages from one top-level area to another, just copy them or export them and re-import them in their own area. Mostly, that works without a glitch (exceptions prove the rule) and even cross-area-links will continue to work. For more complicated restructuring, one can always use the XML-Export and load it into an XML-Editor. Of course, that´s for people who can read and understand XML structure.

Atlassian should rethink its withdrawal of the self-hosted version of the product. They only offer cloud-based service or the "datacenter-edition", which is quite expensive for small companies and private users.

I have been using and recommending Atlassian Confluence for more than four years now, and never had to regret it until the end of 2020, when they suddenly got this cloud madness.

Not only does the cloud version come nowhere near the responsiveness of the self-hosted version (which is a matter of course, as self-hosted servers are within the LAN with single-digit milliseconds of round trip time, whereas cloud-hosted servers will always have 20+ ms), but also it requires a customer to entrust their data to a third party, which is in many cases a no-go.

The only way out would be to buy the "datacenter edition" and thus spend a whole lot more money on the product. This may be what Atlassian intended in the first place and if so, shame on them.

With that, I will no longer recommend the product, as I am opposed to the cloud-first hype. Our data should be our own and we should be free to decide where we store them.

We have been using Atlassian Confluence for approximately five years.

No complaints that I know of - unless some admin shoots the underlying VM (has been heard to happen), confluence is just rock-solid. To be sure: It needs some resources, and if the VM starves of memory or CPU, performance and stability will suffer.

As I said, the largest environment i was working with at a customer has 100+ authors and I imagine plenty of pages and other content - sadly I do not know the exact figures - but we never had reason to complain in our project which only consisted of 12 people actively using Confluence. So I guess scalability should not be an issue.

Prior to Confluence, I tried working with Microsoft SharePoint. Well, there were those sad tries, and my advice is to forget it.

SharePoint may have advantages when it comes to organize and share files, but the ease and intuitive way to create structured documentation just is not there.

And as a sidenote: When working on projects we would oftentimes edit a page in confluence with three or four of us concurrently updating table entries or text segments. Very seldom have I experienced problems with allowing concurrent edits and in my mind never incorrect merging of inputs. Again, that is true for the on-premises self-hosted version, in the cloud that does not work quite as well.

And why do I point this out: Have any of you tried to edit a word document in MS Teams concurrently? ... it produces quite funny effects but in my opinion cannot be trusted, really.

The cases where I set up the server myself were straightforward and went without any glitch along the documented steps.

Up until now I only had inhouse admins implement the servers, they did it noiselessly and with satisfying results.

Erm. ROI. Hm. Can anybody please call the finance guy? ...

Well, that´s difficult now. Until the end of 2020, using a self-hosted server, have one of your IT-Admins set it up, costs $10 a year for the 10-Author license.

Nowadays? Don´t use it. The price of the on-premises data center version is too expensive.

To be honest, after being introduced to Confluence by a colleague all those years ago, I did not evaluate any other option in earnest.

Recently, I started looking at Tiki Wiki, which is a fully OpenSource alternative, but I haven´t gotten around to installing it or using it in a new project.

I would not consider alternatives but for the policy of Atlassian. Such a good product should run in every datacenter. NOT in the Clouds, though.

My advice for everybody is to flame Atlassian into re-providing the self-hosted server version!

I use it for documentation, project reports, and creating a knowledge base. 

It's used for building a knowledge base and providing status updates on tasks.

I don't see many features in the version we use. We do find the ability to build workflow diagrams helpful, but that might be through external modules/plugins.

The diagram tool is a positive addition.

However, the only integration we use is with Jira.

There is room for improvement in maybe the tree structure for articles. If you have a lot of articles, it becomes difficult to navigate. 

Having the ability to control which articles appear in the main tree structure and only linking or hyperlinking to others within specific articles could be an improvement.

I have been using this solution for ten years. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It seems highly scalable. There are 500 end users using this solution. 

We have IT, service desk agents, and regular users across different functions. Everyone is using it. For example, if someone needs to look up documentation or assistance with workflows, they would use Confluence.

It's used alongside Jira. Each team would likely have a Jira code for that purpose.

I've used ClickUp. It's a good tool, especially compared to Jira. Confluence still has room to improve in comparison. We also used a legacy tool called CBQ.

ClickUp is becoming a real competitor to Jira and Confluence because it's an all-in-one tool. You don't need separate licenses for project management and knowledge bases. ClickUp has a more seamless experience.  

I've heard of Asana, but I personally prefer ClickUp. If I were starting a company from scratch, I would consider ClickUp over Jira, Confluence, Trello, etc. It's really user-friendly.

I would recommend using this solution. It's not necessarily better than tools like Asana, but it gets the job done.

Jira and Confluence have strong market presence, and migrating existing systems can be a challenge. 

For new projects, I would certainly recommend considering other options. For established teams, switching tools might not be practical. But if you're starting fresh, explore alternatives and don't just default to Jira and Confluence.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten 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.