Easy to use but slow to load
February 09, 2022

Easy to use but slow to load

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Miro

Team building, workshopping, general team collaboration, stand-ups, weekly team retrospectives, component, and pattern inventory work. I have used Miro for an in-depth UX Pattern inventory, in which we gathered relevant screenshots from our product and annotated around them to note and gather the patterns we have built throughout the product. The aim was to identify inconsistencies so we could set up tickets to resolve UX issues. In hindsight, I would’ve found Figma to be a more efficient way of working. I found Miro to really slow my laptop as the board was quite large. This made it difficult to review issues found when we got to the end stages of the project. We eventually moved our findings to Confluence to provide our extended team with more visibility. We frequently use the Jira integrations for stand-up boards. I attempted to set up a board for a recent contextual inquiry (Diary study), in which participants would access the board and write entries about their work process to aid our research. I ended up moving to Figma as I found I had more control over the customization of text elements. I wasn’t satisfied with the experience the study participants would have using Miro and found Figma to be more intuitive in terms of design.
  • Allows easy collaboration between team members, especially in conference workshops where one person will share their screen and others populate the board. Usually, this will include the use of the post its.
  • Jira integration. We find it helpful to refer to our tickets Miro boards, especially in team stand-ups and retrospectives.
  • I really like the functionality provided when embedding web pages, copying and pasting URLs, and being provided with easy-to-refer-to snippets of the page content. This is usually helpful in generative exploration and brainstorming.
  • Boards often run very slow, and in a product where team collaboration is the main functionality, this can cause serious problems. If I have a big board of work and need to present it, I usually decide to present it in another product to avoid long loading times and lagging/freezing. Zoom can also make the issue worse.
  • There are limited customization capabilities with elements such as post-it notes. Although this can be helpful when working quickly, I often find for big projects I cannot personalize the elements enough which, for me, negatively impacts my experience.
  • Images pulled into Miro can often be compressed so much that the quality is reduced, however, I’m unsure why this occurs
  • Reduced project completion time with slow loading times and lagging when moving around a highly populated board
  • Increased team effectiveness and with routine collaboration and small workshops
Can be difficult to control the account team.
Miro increases team effectiveness but I find I don’t integrate it into my daily work process due to issues with loading time. I’m often working on larger projects and end up turning to Figma.
Positively, it is often used in our teams in the beginning stages of a project.

Do you think Miro delivers good value for the price?

Not sure

Are you happy with Miro's feature set?


Did Miro live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Miro go as expected?

I wasn't involved with the implementation phase

Would you buy Miro again?


Colleagues are familiar with Miro and the functionality provided by Miro allows team members who are unfamiliar with other products like Figma to collaborate more effectively
Well suited for small team projects such as stand-ups, retrospectives, and kanban boards. Less appropriate for bigger projects where lots of elements are in one board. Very slow with many images, web embeds, etc.