Confluence is a collaboration and content sharing platform used primarily by customers who are already using Atlassian's Jira project tracking product. The product appeals particularly to IT users.
$6.40
per month per user
Azure DevOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Microsoft Teams
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Teams combines video conferencing software with team collaboration tools. The communications platform allows MS Office users to conduct conference calls and share files via SharePoint, and join or initiate a group chat.
$4.80
per month per user
Pricing
Atlassian Confluence
Azure DevOps
Microsoft Teams
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
Free for 10 Users
Standard
$6.40
per month per user
Premium
$12.30
per month per user
Data Center
220,000.00
40,001+ Users - Annually
Enterprise
Contact Sales
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
Basic + Test Plan
$52
per user per month
Microsoft Teams Essentials
$4.80
per month per user
Microsoft Teams Enterprise
$5.25
per month (paid yearly) per user
Microsoft Teams Enterprise
$5.25
per month per user
Microsoft 365 Business Basic
$7.20
per month per user
Microsoft 365 Business Standard
$15
per month per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Confluence
Azure DevOps
Microsoft Teams
Free Trial
Yes
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Prices shown here reflect prices for deployments with 100 users or less. The prices decrease wien the user base surpasses 100.
—
Discounts are available for non profit organizations.
SharePoint in out organisation was mostly used for collaborating on documents, which to some degree has been moved to Confluence, where the Confluence pages have replaced the specific documents.
I personally prefer the usage of alternative project management or document storage apps. Atlassian Confluence is useful in having a centralised spot for multiple types of information, as opposed to Trello for example, and is much more structured. However, it has low visual …
It integrates well with other SAAS products and has been our industry standard for all projects that we're involved in.
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Atlassian Confluence
The way the knowledge is stored and indexed in Atlassian Confluence is very advanced so that it can be easily accessed. It supports including images, links, etc so that we can convey the idea very well. Overall it's very useful for organizations where new features are rolled …
Atlassian Confluence is more intuitive than MS SharePoint, however, SharePoint has some reach features because of the MS integration with its tools stack.
Verified User
Team Lead
Chose Atlassian Confluence
Confluence smashes competitors out of the ballpark. There is no compromise for quality and great product design with Atlassian
Google Drive is not comparable to confluence, but it was the only other means for collaboration of documents and a shared hub for resources. But it serves more as a folder for resources rather than a repository of pages in information with links, documents, collaboration, …
There are complementary and we are in fact using both of them in out organisation. We are using Google Drive for advanced real-time cooperation when creating documents, since Google Drive can handle this in a more streamlined and easier way than Confluence. Still, Confluence …
I have used other tools that allow for documentation and housing of other business-related documents but none that I used had the same integration or general ability to add and edit information. I am also a general user so I don't know how easy/difficult the backend is, but …
We were using MS SharePoint which was integrated with TFS for managing our developer workflow and it was quite clunky. We had to be signed into the VPN to access any of it and it relied upon Internet Explorer for access. It felt slow and sometimes you could use other browsers …
Confluence was trying to be too much for our needs; we needed a scrum process management tool and Microsoft Visual Studio Team System turned out to have the exact set of features we needed.
Currently, we use both products, however, we use more the Atlassian suite. We have started recently using Azure DevOps for specific implementations and projects. We don't have any plan yet to migrate all our projects to Azure DevOps, we may in the next couple of years. …
ADO has better linking than Confluence and is adaptable for a specific need, whereas Confluence might be a bit more rigid, but it's also sort of along the same lines as to what can be done with both tools. ADO also had an ease of use to it and can do a bunch of stuff with it, …
We love the multi-tier hierarchy in Azure DevOps for tasks, with epics, features, stories, bugs and tasks all available in a nice nested hierarchy. It's not as pretty as monday.com and doesn't work as well OOTB as ServiceNow SPM however.
Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing …
Trello is simple to use, but it's only for a Kanban board. Jira might be the same, but I don't really have enough experience with Jira to fully compare them. When I used it, it missed certain functionalities that I was used to in Azure DevOps. Visually it's a lot different too.
Writing the Docker Images, Storing them in Azure Container Registry and then Deploying onto Azure Kubernetes Services is an Easier process which no other software/product is currently providing in the market. Best till date in terms of End to End deployment and maintaining …
Verified User
Employee
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps is widely used because of its collaboration and integration with various other tools. Here the assign of the sub task is quite easy compare to Jira. Also Azure Devops can we integrate easily with Git for better code representation and versioning. It reporting is …
Azure DevOps is a completed product and ecosystem. It offers a robust ecosystem that does everything that is needed. The above products do lack features like pipelines tasks, third-party integrations. Besides all cloud benefits, the main advantage of Azure DevOps Services …
Beside all cloud benefits, the main advantage Azure DevOps Services compared to Azure DevOps Server is the easier remote access for third party team members, and always up to date software. On the other hand, on prem deployment (Azure DevOps Server) makes complex access or …
Azure DevOps covers way more than just an awesome Agile storyboard. The widgets, the reporting, the interaction with Power BI and the features that hook into pull requests and DevOps in general, go way beyond what your competitors offer. I find Azure DevOps easy to navigate …
Azure DevOps offers full lifecycle management from ideas to development to test and release. Everything is in one place and has traceability from inception to release, maintenance and retirement. The other systems only offer small parts of what Azure DevOps has. They offer …
Our TFS was dated and in some ways was quite crude. VSTS is thoroughly modern and I don't have to worry about updating it since MS is always updating VSTS. Also, VSTS has better integration with other products such as JIRA than our older TFS would. I am sure you could integrate …
Microsoft Teams is a complementary tool I used in my software panel. So it can cover many cases where partners are not using the same tools as the ones used in my firm. It is a complementary tool with other ones like Miro, Slack, and Jira, for example, in order to facilitate …
Verified User
Professional
Chose Microsoft Teams
Microsoft Teams is just a nicer front end to SharePoint for file and document management but it also has a good communication network for internal and external parties. It's easy to use on mobile device as well. It also integrates well with Microsoft Power Platform etc, meaning …
With Microsoft Teams you can better check each one's agenda. The background when in a meeting is better. Microsoft Teams also have more options for integrations in place. It's also easier and more intuitive. It also offers more options of communicating and not only video …
Verified User
Administrator
Chose Microsoft Teams
Our company used to use Skype for Business and for a short time, we used Slack. We've been using Teams for over a year now and it has surpassed both of those tools. Audio calls over Skype always had technical difficulties and sound issues, though screen-sharing worked pretty …
We used Adium in the past for our direct department and HipChat company-wide. I didn't mind HipChat so much, but it didn't have nearly as many features as Teams offers. Adium was a big pain in my butt because it is used for not just the company, but everything else you are …
I think Teams is ahead of the game. Its tight integration with the Microsoft suite has no rival. Having Azure as the backend provides a secure environment in the cloud with content accessible anytime anywhere. Microsoft is heavily investing in the product and constantly adding …
I would recommend Atlassian Confluence for companies that want to have internal documentation and minimum governance processes to ensure documentation is useful and doesn't have a lot of duplicated and non-updated content. I wouldn't recommend Atlassian Confluence for companies with a low budget since this product might be a little costly (especially with add-ons).
Azure DevOps works well when you’ve got larger delivery efforts with multiple teams and a lot of moving parts, and you need one place to plan work, track it properly, and see how everything links together. It’s especially useful when delivery and development are closely tied and you want backlog items, code and releases connected rather than spread across tools. Where it’s less of a fit is for small teams or simple pieces of work, as it can feel like more setup and process than you really need, and non-technical users often struggle with the interface. It also isn’t great if you want instant, easy programme-level views or a very visual planning experience without putting time into configuration.
It's amazing as a daily driver for team communication, and document search/store. Also, if you're doing a lot of LONG meetings and have trouble remembering details, the AI summarization is amazing and convenient. It just works. I'm not saying I always do this, of course, but if I need to 'skim' instead of really digging into every detail from a meeting, the AI-generated summary is generally good enough that I can get away with it.
Cross product linking - If you use other Atlassian products then Atlassian Confluence is a no-brainer for your source of documentation, knowledge management etc. You can show previews of the linked asset natively E.g. showing a preview of a JIRA ticket in a Atlassian Confluence page.
Simple editing - Though the features available may not be super complex right now, this does come with the benefit of making it easy to edit and create documents. Some documentation editors can be overwhelming, Atlassian Confluence is simple and intuitive.
Native marketplace - If you want to install add-ons to your Atlassian Confluence space it's really easy. Admins can explore the Atlassian marketplace natively and install them to your instance in a few clicks. You can customise your Atlassian Confluence instance in many different ways using add-ons.
UI Design is very simplistic and basic could make use of more visually interesting colour choices, layout choices, etc.
Under the 'Content' menu, it defaults to having a landing page for all L1 and L2 category pages. Meaning as long as the broader content category has a sub-category, it still creates a separate landing page. In my team's case, this often creates blank pages, as we only fill out the page at the lowest sub-category (L3).
Hyperlinks are traditionally shown as blue, however, this results into very monotonously blue pages in cases where a lot of information is being linked.
I did mention it has good visibility in terms of linking, but sometimes items do get lost, so if there was a better way to manage that, that would be great.
The wiki is not the prettiest thing to look at, so it could have refinements there.
The webinars feature has some missing functionally such as the ability for all users to use the Q&A feature (only those with a Microsoft Teams account can use it now), the ability to upload documents for attendees to easily access and download, and the ability for presenters and organizers to easily chat amongst themselves throughout the webinar.
The "Channels" organization hierarchy could be more clear. If you have several channels set up, it can get clunky and hard to find the specific channel you are looking for.
The MS Planner tool lacks functionality and organization. You cannot assign more than one person to a task and it's confusing when you try to share tasks with people - it would be nice if they were automatically added to someone's calendar.
I am confident that Atlassian can come with additional and innovative macros and functions to add value to Confluence. In 6 months, Atlassian transformed a good collaborative tools into a more comprehensive system that can help manage projects and processes, as well as "talk" with other Atlassian products like Jira. We are in fact learning more about Jira to evaluate a possible fit to complement our tool box.
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
Microsoft Teams is included with our Office 365 subscription and we have no intention of migrating off of Office 365 and Microsoft products. Since Microsoft Teams is included for free with our Office 365 subscription, and since we enjoy all the features, benefits, and functionality, there is no question that our team will continue to use the product
Great for organizing knowledge in a hierarchical format. Seamless for engineering and product teams managing software development. Helps in formatting pages effectively, reducing manual work. Tracks changes well and allows for easy rollbacks. Granular controls for who can view/edit pages. Search function is not great which needs improvement. Hire some google engineers
It's a great help to get more information about new feature release and stay updated on what the dev team is working on. I like how easy it is to just login and read through the work items. Each work item has basic details: Title, Description, Assigned to, State, Area (what it belongs to), and iteration (when it’s worked on). See image above.They move through different states (New → Discovery → Ready for Prod → etc.).
If you have the full Microsoft Office suite, it works really well because it's integrated well within its ecosystem, but if not, it can be annoying because it tries to open a shared file in the web versions of the file equivalents. The web version is also a bit slow, and the login is very difficult to handle if you have multiple Microsoft or Outlook accounts.
We never worked against the tide while using Confluence. Everything loads considerably fast, even media components like videos (hosted on the platform or embed external videos from Youtube, for example). We are not using heavy media components a lot, but in the rare occasion we happen to use one we have no problems whatsoever.
This rating is specifically for Atlassian's self-help documentation on their website. Often times, it is not robust enough to cover a complex usage of one of their features. Frequently, you can find an answer on the web, but not from Atlassian. Instead, it is usually at a power user group elsewhere on the net.
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
The overall support provided by Microsoft for Microsoft Teams has been quite good but there is still some room for improvements. Microsoft needs to proactively work on fixing the open bugs in order to provide a seamless experience to the users. But over the service and experience provided by the Microsoft team have been quite satisfactory.
We chose Atlassian Confluence over SharePoint because it's much more user-friendly and intuitive. Atlassian Confluence makes collaboration and knowledge sharing easier with its simpler interface and better search. While SharePoint can be powerful, it often feels clunky and complex, making it harder for our team to actually use it.
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or more business-focused projects. We also use ServiceNow for IT service management and this tool provides better analysis and tracking of IT incidents, as Azure DevOps is more suited to development and project work for dev teams.
Microsoft Teams offers a much more integrated experience between their chat and video call function compared to Google Chat and Slack. Both other tools are much better for internal communications are they have simpler UI without other features. Whereas Microsoft Teams can be used for more critical conversations, particularly between external companies, and has been very useful in sales conversations which is what we chose it for when speaking to companies that work exclusively through Microsoft.
Honestly, this tool is worth every penny. Yes, it's not free and you pay for the quality of services and the license. But the ROI and the benefits are all there. Also, the renewal, negotiation, and contract terms are all very well explained by our Microsoft account manager, and she's a charm.
I used Skype for Business to take calls, hold conferences, and provide remote assistance to users. Microsoft Teams, on the other hand, is superior to Skype for Business in my opinion. My job entails a lot of screen sharing.
We have saved a ton of time not calculating metrics by hand.
We no longer spend time writing out cards during planning, it goes straight to the board.
We no longer track separate documents to track overall department goals. We were able to create customized icons at the department level that lets us track each team's progress against our dept goals.
Personally, I would say that by using Microsoft Teams, it upped my collaboration with my colleagues by around 50% or around more than half of what I usually did prior to using it.
I had 100% show rate and attendance on all of my meetings in the past 6 months.
If I may add, I also have been chattier & collaborative towards my colleagues in past 3 months particularly the month of December when we had huge traffic at work. I would estimate this behavior to have been increased by around 60% than what I usually incur during normal operating days.