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
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
Quickbase
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Quickbase helps users tackle any project, no matter how complex. Quickbase helps customers see, connect and control complex projects. Whether it’s raising a skyscraper or coordinating vaccine rollouts, the no-code software platform allows business users to custom fit solutions to the way they work – using information from across the systems they already have.
$700
per month
Pricing
Atlassian Confluence
Microsoft Teams
Quickbase
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
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
Enterprise
Full Customizable
per month/billed annually
Business
Starting at $2,200
per month
Team
Started at $700
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Confluence
Microsoft Teams
Quickbase
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Optional
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.
Quickbase offers three key plans, with feature distinction, simple and consistent entitlements, and a flexible licensing model, giving users the option of either user based or usage based licensing across all 3 plans.
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 …
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 …
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 …
Having said that, it’s more complex to develop in so end users can do more themselves in Smartsheet.
Verified User
Executive
Chose Quickbase
From what I've seen in other products that are similarly marketed, Quickbase is far and away the best. The level of flexibility, the number of possible integrations, and the overall user friendliness make Quickbase a formidable solution for any organization looking to improve …
Microsoft Access was one of the DB programs that I have used in a job previous to my current one. I found it to have many more features than Quickbase does but it was a lot harder to set up and maintain. Also, it was harder to share among multiple teams. I basically feel that …
Excel required more manual updating to keep data synchronized. Users often emailed copies of spreadsheets that were outdated almost as soon as they were received. We had less control over how the data was inputted in the spreadsheets while Quickbase allows us to customize …
I've lately found Quickbase lagging in being able to easily build dashboards from the data versus Microsoft BI as an example. However, for smaller scale projects/items, I do still prefer Quickbase. It's more on the larger scale cross-team projects where there seems to be a gap …
If we talked about the agile feature Jira is a better well-suited application for managing and that is one of the main reasons Quickbase is not the selected one for us, also we preferred to use two or more apps to handle everything in their specialized application whether to …
We have not used or evaluated any other product. QuickBase was the first one we looked at and was the only option we considered. It was not necessary for us to look any further as everything that we were looking for was accessible to us through what QuickBase had to offer.
Quick Base has a different use case than Zendesk which is ticket triaging that is customer-facing. Quick Base is internally focused like JIRA but also not as development team heavy. If Quick Base could strike a nice balance to only cater to the needs of internal management …
We found Teams and Microsoft System Center Service Manager was good for the task but we found they didn't allow the flexibility that Quick Base did. We also found that Quick Base was user-friendly and easier to role out. My previous company spent two years scouting, trying …
While Jira is a powerful and useful tool, we found that Quick Base offered more customization, simple to use interface, and a better pricing model. At the end of the day, the decision was a good one, as our output increased after making the switch from Atlassian JIRA Align to …
We were looking for a collaborative team task tracking solution and reviewed many different products that were dedicated to solving such a problem, or had the capability. QuickBase can both allow you to create it from scratch or apply a pre-defined template from its market …
For the smaller company I was at where we did all of the production in-house, JIRA was definitely a better match. QuickBase works well for the larger corporation that our company is because it helps manage those larger moving pieces that are part of our process.
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).
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.
I no longer think that Quickbase is the way of the future. They do not fix major bugs in a timely manner, and are releasing basic functionality behind a paywall. I believe that Enterprise Level Tier should be given certain things, like SLAs on Support and up-time. However, as a low-code no-code platform the majority of the accounts, "builders", and users are not going to be able to justify the cost of an Enterprise Tier Plan, and won't be able to use the features that Quickbase continues to advertise.
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.
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'd like to see a link on email notices that take you directly into said notice. On an app that only has 1 or 2 email notices firing, there's no issue. However, we have some tools that are so complex that they have about 20 email notices firing at any given time based on the action users take. In this case, if we have to go in to modify a notice, we have to guess or scroll down the long list of notices to see which one we need to customize. It would be great if Quickbase had the URL of said notice somewhere at the footer of that notice so when Administrators click on it, it takes them into the exact notice they need to update.
When filling out or reviewing a lengthy form, I'd like to see the Save & close button, as well as a Save & next option at the bottom of the form rather than having to scroll back up to the top of those forms just to click on those choices.
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.
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
For our use-case of QuickBase, there really aren't any other products out there that can offer us the same out-of-the-box solutions they provide to us. We're also so integrated with it in our daily processes that to move away from it abruptly would cause mass chaos, so it's going to be renewed for at least the next several years.
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
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.
Quick Base has done everything we have asked it to do and then some. Our original goal was to have one system for CRM that encompassed both the sales process and the customer management. We have gone w-a-y beyond that with analytics, project management, system bug logging, and historical effort reporting.
Once we did get Quick Base configured and customized it was reliably available when we needed it. We may have had one or two occasions when the product was inaccessible but those were few. The greatest challenge with its availability was its difficulty with integrating with our systems.
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.
Some of our tables that hold over a million records are starting to perform poorly, with some summaries taking over 20 seconds to load. This may be an indication that it is best to archive old data when reaching large volumes like this.
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.
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.
If you utilize the community, the support is amazing. Unfortunately, I find their actual support system a bit underwhelming. They don't seem to have a great process for interacting directly with an issue and often sweep significant issues under the rug by categorizing them as "Enhancement" ideas or legacy items.
Quick Base already is having a separate portal of providing training to customers and it is very easy to use and updates as per the new features added in to the application
I was not directly involved with the initial account implementation, only a bystander. For the app I directly implemented for my department only, I wish I had know to create an app diagram first. I don't remember if that was suggested. I think that would be a great help tip tool when a new app is created, to have a page with a check list of what is needed or how to get started. If you are a regular app builder, then you can bypass it or have the ability to turn it off in the app settings.
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 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.
Well, there's a plethora of low-code tools out on the marketplace and, you know, there's a reason that we've decided to partner with QuickBase because it has all the right balance of the ability to integrate with the ability for a citizen developer to create apps successfully. So if you look at something like Zo Ho's low-code offering, for example, yes, there are some similarities there, but they're really dependent on all of their other licensed products to get you where you want to be, where with QuickBase you have the ability to truly create something custom.
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.
It has evolved really well with our company, but there is a hard limit to the table size that has begun to affect us and not let us grow. The table size limit is set at 500 MB and we have had to jump through quite a few hoops to be able to get by.
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.
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.
ROI is HUGE. Our company saved over 3.5 million in one year alone based on developments that year in Quickbase that saved time for many teams
Less user error - implementing automations and standardized workflows has led to less user error as was previously seen by maintaining spreadsheets or Smartsheets