Atlassian Confluence Reviews

We document all the processes and flows we are planning to implement on projects. We capture all kinds of documentation. 

It's the best application to document all types of information. That's the best part. It's a good product, generally.

The solution is stable.

We can scale it. 

Technical support is helpful. 

On the cloud, we do not have a source editor if you want to go and validate the watch type of HTML or if you want to pull that HTML content for that cloud of pages. Atlassian needs to provide the source editor or a built-in plugin. 

I've been using the solution for more than six years. It's been a while. 

The solution is quite stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

600 people are using the solution currently.

While the solution is scalable, we had an issue with each user. For example, users are not able to log into their applications on the cloud. Only on the cloud do we face this issue.

Technical support has been helpful. We are very satisfied with the level of support they provide.

In terms of the initial setup, we were not able to do it right. Separately, we needed to build our own add-on.

I'm a customer and end-user.

While now we use the Atlassian cloud deployment, it used to be deployed on-premises. 

It's a simple application for documentation. New users just need to know how to create the permissions or the pages, the restrictions, or the macros. If they know, that's fine. They can use the Confluence application and they will find it very easy.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

We are using Atlassian Confluence as a repository for files.

The most valuable feature of Atlassian Confluence is the ability to access your files from anywhere.

Atlassian Confluence should improve the interface, it needs to be more user-friendly. It is easy to use, but it could be more intuitive.

I have been using Atlassian Confluence for six months.

Atlassian Confluence is stable.

I have found Atlassian Confluence to be scalable.

We had approximately 25 people using this solution in my organization.

I have not used the support from Atlassian Confluence.

Atlassian Confluence was relatively simple to set up. The time it took was only a few minutes.

My advice to others before using this solution is to look at some tutorials or do a quick workshop to understand how the platform works. They can use a Google search and YouTube to find information.

I rate Atlassian Confluence a six out of ten.

We have a standalone, server-based version. Confluence is installed onsite. Nowadays, they don't provide any standalone versions anymore. They just provide the cloud versions for subscription.

Confluence is easy to use and integrate with other solutions, including social media platforms. 

Managing user permissions and credentials could be easier. 

I've been using Confluence for about five or six years.

Confluence has average stability. 

Confluence's scalability is okay, but you have some performance problems when you're working with too many people. 

We have many engineers, so we don't need to contact Atlassian support. 

Deploying Confluence is complex. It requires deploying many other libraries. We don't pay for maintenance anymore. We just maintain the solution ourselves. 

We buy the solutions through the internet and install them ourselves.

They provide both subscription models, but I don't manage the licensing for our company, so I don't know what it costs. 

I rate Atlassian Confluence seven out of 10. I think the on-premise solution we have isn't good for novices. If you don't have a lot of experience, you should try the cloud solution. 

My team uses this solution for documentation and collaboration.

The solution is very intuitive and provides excellent content management.

You can easily switch between tools through hyperlinks. It is also well integrated with Jira.

In the next release, I would like to have the ability to import pictures.

I have been using this solution for about six months.

The solution is scalable, we currently have about two hundred users who are senior employees within our IT department.

There is an annual license.

I used Confluence mostly for the wiki and documentation.

The most valuable features are the ease of creating documentation, as well as charts.

Space maintenance could be made a little more user-friendly.

I have been working with Atlassian Confluence for at least six years.

There are no bugs or glitches that I'm aware of.

This product is scalable.

Atlassian technical support is pretty good.

I am currently using the cloud version, but previously, I used to use the on-premises deployment model.

The initial setup was easy, and not complex at all.

We have an in-house team to take of maintenance.

Confluence is a good product and I recommend it. My only complaint is that certain things, such as space management, can be made easier.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use it as a knowledge management tool for all of our consultants, which are architects.

The whole solution is really great. I appreciate the ability to create content, link content, and then search for that content when I need to. 

I love all of the add-ons the solution offers. You get the base product, and then you can plug in a ton of third-party apps. There's a whole ecosystem of third-party products you can add in if there are any features that may be missing on Confluence itself. That's really great. 

There are very good notifications and links. You can subscribe to a page, and whenever that page gets edited, you're notified of a change on that page.

I suppose just the whole structure and organization is what I really like about Confluence. You have at least 500 odd pages. The way it's structured, again, to speed up the ability to find stuff, is phenomenal. 

The self-service capabilities are helpful. Anyone can create content. We do, in fact. It's not one person running lots and lots of pages of content, it's everyone. You can self-service, update, and change things yourself, which is good. It's a great collaboration endeavor. We are a team of 15 people and we'll leverage the content we've created previously. The ability to collaborate on the content is quite critical to us.

The integration's very good. You still have integration with lots of third party products, and it's very good. 

We've used a lot of time in correcting our knowledge in this product. Can't really think of a negative feature of the product.

This is kind of by design, however, the lack of control in terms of editing the page to make it look the way you want it to look is an issue. It would be nice if there was more flexibility there.

It's only a very constrained format you can use. You cannot change the font and you can't really make them smaller. It is by design, but it doesn't like people playing with those aspects. It's probably gone a bit too far. The inability to format the layout of a page is an issue for us.

The logic for searching for pages is a bit off. I assumed it would be very smart in terms of looking at the content on your page and looking at what people clicked on. I assumed it would be like Google in that it would know what people clicked on previously when they were looking for this keyword, what page do they click on, et cetera. It doesn't. I found some detailed explanation of exactly how the search works and it's quite disappointing. It's very basic. Search largely depends on the title of your actual document. It doesn't look at the words in the document, and doesn't look at the search history, in terms of how people pick pages.

It turns out that the searching algorithms are very basic. When I assumed the product was bad, it was actually due to the fact that most of the knowledge management tools have very smart searching logic. This one doesn't. 

I've been using the solution for probably less than a year. It hasn't been too long.

The solution is reliable. I haven't seen a single bug or issue with the product. It's very stable. 

We have about 15 users on the solution currently.

As a company, we use Microsoft Teams. A lot of our customers say, "Oh, I know, we've got the same features in Microsoft Teams." However, that really isn't the case. Usually, if you're in a Microsoft shop, you would try and use all the Microsoft products. This is one space where Microsoft Teams doesn't cut it. We're using the Confluence instead.

The initial setup is very, very good. It's not complex it all. It's very straightforward and they make it very easy.

The entire setup isn't an intricate process. We didn't have to pour over documentation to try and figure things out. We just followed our instincts and it worked out quite well.

We handled the implementation ourselves. We didn't need any assistance from consultants or integrators.

For us, it's free to use. We don't pay any licensing.

We don't have a business relationship with Atlassian. We're just customers.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

This solution is highly recommended. If you're looking for a product in this space, this is the best. We had another really good tool, however, we find Confluence does the same and a whole lot more. I'd say in the knowledge management space, as far as we've been doing our business, and our job is to find tools for organizations, I'm convinced that this is the top product in this space.

Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. My one issue is the search capabilities. Otherwise, it's pretty perfect.

We have got our own private Confluence set up. In our department, we use Jira and Confluence a lot. These are our in-house go-to tools for managing the agile ways of working. We sort of follow a bit of both models: traditional and agile. We follow the traditional waterfall model outside of Confluence and Jira, so that's more like requirements, specifications, and documents. There's another team, with which I haven't been that involved, that writes user stories and allocates tasks in Jira. They use it quite heavily.

We use Jira more for agile type processing, like for Kanban boards and all that sort of stuff and allocating work tasks and two-week sprints. It supports the actual agile process. Jira is much more focused on the process of delivery.

It is just the fact that it is a one-stop shop for all project documentation. It is compared to storing things in files and directories and stuff like that. It provides the overall usability and accessibility of many projects and documents in one area. 

It would be good if they can continue working towards making documentation and editing as quick and easy as possible. 

It has got a lot of capability, but I don't know how to use it. I don't find some of the things that intuitive. Sometimes, it doesn't seem obvious to me how to use it, but it is like learning any new tool. You actually need to get trained on the tool to get maximum out of it.

I have been using this solution for the last two to three years.

It is scalable.

We have our own engineers.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I would rate Atlassian Confluence an eight out of ten. It provides everything for our use cases.

Our primary use for this solution is EA documentation.

Confluence has helped us through its ease of use and access to relevant information in a targeted way.

The most valuable features are hyper-linking, the Drawing Tool, and enhanced tables.

The standard table capability is substandard and virtually unusable.  However with the "Advanced Tables for Confluence" from Bob Swift, this problem was solved.  The standard table functionality does not have enough functionality to document things clearly starting with colors.  The other tool which is extremely useful is IO Draw although it is expensive.  With these two extensions, I was able to really maximize my use of Confluence.

I have been using this solution for four years.