We performed a comparison between Atlassian Confluence and Microsoft Teams based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the above variables we would conclude that Microsoft Teams finishes ahead of Atlassian Confluence. With Microsoft Teams, users get great collaborative options, documentation workflows, and follow-up. The additional benefit of extraordinary call conferencing options that are fully integrated with the entire Microsoft ecosystem makes it a very easy choice for many users.
"Many people enjoy its zero learning-curve."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Great shareable and co-editing features."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution helped us to see where we were going wrong and where we were doing good, and that helped us to make proper decisions"
"We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket."
"It's extremely intuitive."
"The sharing of information and simple formatting are valuable features. That is, there are no templates, and everything uses one format. This means that people don't need to worry about formatting."
"I find the ability to maintain group and conference information for project-related work useful."
"I think what the team likes most is the improvements when it comes to communication."
"The solution helps with collaborative communication. You can use it to chat and book calls. You can even set the status as away. It also has a transcript feature integrated."
"The video conferencing is good."
"We like it because it makes it easy to communicate, chat, make video calls, and schedule meetings with people."
"The recording function, the transcript function, the chat function, the live caption function, and the setting up of groups to share documents are useful features of Microsoft Teams."
"Microsoft Teams is a friendly and easy-to-install solution."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Teams is that it is integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem."
"It lacks ease of integration."
"The dashboards should be improved."
"The roadmap feature should be made easier to work with and modify. It's not really scalable."
"When we import the data in Confluence from Word or any other document, the formatting is not correct."
"RAM usage seems to be higher than it should be."
"Some elements of the user interface could be more user-friendly, including embedding diagrams."
"Atlassian should rethink its withdrawal of the self-hosted version of the product. They only offer cloud-based service or the "datacenter-edition", which is quite expensive for small companies and private users."
"Atlassian Confluence's old versions consume too much memory, making it an area where optimization is required from an improvement perspective."
"The only issue is sometimes, when I share my screen, and there's text on it, the compression can make it very blurry. If Teams could solve this problem so that text remains clear during screen sharing, that would be nice."
"For future releases, I would like to see Microsoft Teams to make a lighter application and drop some features."
"One area that could be improved is the authentication process, especially related to Windows sign-on authentication."
"User interface could be improved"
"The solution's security feature needs enhancement for external collaborations with business partners and vendors."
"The solution should fix the ease of use directly outside of the office environment. Right now, unless I'm at my office desktop, it's hard to access it."
"The product should improve its security."
"The chat option in the Teams tab is not very helpful. We don't use it very often. There is also an expiration on the recordings. It would be useful to not have a time limit."
Atlassian Confluence is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Social Software with 99 reviews while Microsoft Teams is ranked 1st in Enterprise Social Software with 145 reviews. Atlassian Confluence is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Teams is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Atlassian Confluence writes "Good usability, helpful community support, and facilitates well-structured documentation ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Teams writes "Great for project planning and monitoring with easy communication capabilities". Atlassian Confluence is most compared with Microsoft OneDrive, Office 365, SharePoint, Zendesk and Zoho Learn, whereas Microsoft Teams is most compared with SharePoint, Symphony, Loom, Chatter and Huddle. See our Atlassian Confluence vs. Microsoft Teams report.
See our list of best Enterprise Social Software vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Social Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Because Microsoft Teams is not a wiki, therefore it makes no sense to compare it to Confluence, a wiki.
And one should be careful not to store wiki content in (Teams) chats because the data in the chat is not structured and is very difficult to find again.
We would never choose Atlassian products again because the prices increase very much every year, longstanding errors are not fixed, the licensing for on-premise is exorbitantly high and you are practically forced to store the data on the Atlassian servers.
That's why we have several projects underway that aim to replace JIRA, Confluence, etc. And it is a great joy and relief for all team members to be getting closer to this goal.
Microsoft Teams has good conference call quality and is perfect for large group meetings - the up to 90k+ capacity is amazing! The simplicity of scheduling for video conferencing, especially when using Outlook for email and calendar, makes everything very easy. One click to schedule the meeting, one click activates the meeting. It's that easy. They offer different options with backgrounds, which our teams like very much. One favorite feature is the repository, which is great for knowledge management. We can store and retrieve documents, maintain control, and collaborate freely and easily with each other.
We would like to see the same functionality between mobile and desktop applications, though. Some of the features vary greatly and this can make things difficult. Microsoft Teams takes up a lot of bandwidth, which can slow things down at peak times. This can also affect things like screen sharing, downloading, and losing sound and video.
The Wiki software that comes with Atlassian Confluence is great. Atlassian Confluence is extremely intuitive and user-friendly; you don’t have to be tech-savvy to use it. Atlassian Confluence has a great offering of templates that can be used for just about any situation, such as creating documents, charts, or enhanced tables. The hyper-linking and drawing tools are one of our favorite features.
Atlassian Confluence recently stopped offering the self-hosted version of the product. The cloud-based service currently offered can be very expensive for smaller companies. There could also be more flexibility when it comes to editing a page to make it look the way you want it to look.
Conclusion
For what we were looking for, we felt Microsoft Teams was the best fit. You get great collaborative options, documentation workflows, and follow-up. The additional benefit of extraordinary call conferencing options that are fully integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem made it a very easy choice for us.