1. Home
  2. Visual Collaboration Software
  3. Miro Reviews
  4. User Review of Miro
Miro Rocks.
February 28, 2024

Miro Rocks.

Ambrose Taylor | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Miro

I use Miro to: - create functional specs for software systems - develop workflows for guided troubleshooting - map and track ideas for products - visualize problems, and develop solutions. - build network diagrams and topologies and describe network component interactions. It is my go-to diagramming tool for most tasks where I need to diagram something.
  • Easily create diagrams.
  • Easily share boards.
  • UX is simple and quick to learn.
  • UX “acts right”. For me it behaves the way I feel it should.
  • Ability to export into other graphing formats. If it could export into cipher or JSON graph, I would love this tool more than any others.
  • I really need the ability to graph something and convert it to machine language. Currently, we have to use yED, which does graphml and ETL this to JSON. I don’t really like graphml tool and wish this could be done in Miro.
  • I would also love to import machine languages like cipher, XML, and JSON into Miro. Using API would be even better.
  • I think there’s an opportunity for better integration into backend systems that Miro is not trying to leverage.
  • Built product specs.
  • Used those specs to show coders how the product logic should work.
  • Collaborating using idea boards.
  • Developing diagrams for CPOL submissions.
I haven’t really used the whiteboard feature. Mostly just share boards with others in my team at Cisco.
It has a similar diagramming board, but it just isn’t as simple, and Miro is better adapted. Sometimes, what’s most important is how many people in an Org use a product and already know it. Figma is more UI side, whereas Miro is into many spaces.

Do you think Miro delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with Miro's feature set?

Yes

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?

Yes

It is very easy to train someone how to use this tool. Great for workflow creations, system specs, functional diagrams, topologies, and mutual collaboration. It does not work at all for translation to machine graph languages, is not API driven, and so cannot really integrate into some of the guided workflow automation systems I am building. This is a shame because I would choose Miro first, and we do end up doing some of the work in Miro, which we then have to transfer manually. Its export capabilities and file options are severely limited, which is its primary weakness. Give me JSON, cipher, and another graphical machine schema!