We compared Bitbucket and Bitbucket Server based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Bitbucket and Bitbucket Server both offer seamless integration with other development tools, reliable version control systems, and efficient collaboration capabilities. Bitbucket has competitive pricing options, flexible licensing, and responsive customer service. Bitbucket Server provides powerful version control, excellent collaboration features, and comprehensive security measures. Both products require improvement in user interface and navigation, better integration with other tools, and enhancements in performance and scalability.
Features: Bitbucket focuses on its seamless integration with other tools and efficient collaboration capabilities. Bitbucket Server emphasizes powerful version control, reliable repository management, and comprehensive security measures.
Pricing and ROI: Bitbucket offers competitive pricing options and a straightforward setup process. The licensing options are flexible and user-friendly. Users find the pricing to be reasonable and appreciate the straightforward setup process. Users also find the licensing terms to be fair., Bitbucket users praised the platform for streamlining development, enhancing collaboration, and boosting productivity. They found its cost justified for version control and continuous integration. Similarly, Bitbucket Server was also seen as valuable and beneficial for user projects or processes.
Room for Improvement: Bitbucket could benefit from enhancements in terms of its user interface and navigation. Users have suggested the need for a more intuitive design, clearer labeling of features, and improved search functionality. Additionally, better integration with other development tools and platforms is desired. On the other hand, Bitbucket Server also needs improvements in its user interface and navigation, with users emphasizing the need for better integration with other tools and platforms. Additionally, improvements in performance and scalability have been suggested.
Deployment and customer support: Bitbucket has received feedback from users regarding the time needed for implementation. One user spent three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while another user took a week for deployment and setup. It is important to consider both timeframes. In contrast, Bitbucket Server users experienced variation in the duration required for deployment, setup, or implementation. One user spent three months on deployment and a week on setup, while another user completed both deployment and setup in a week, suggesting these phases might refer to the same period., Bitbucket customers highly praise the customer service and support provided. Users appreciate the promptness, efficiency, and knowledgeable assistance received. Bitbucket Server users also commend the support team's responsiveness, efficiency, and helpful guidance.
The summary above is based on 39 interviews we conducted recently with Bitbucket and Bitbucket Server users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"BitBucket is a reliable and user-friendly product."
"The product's initial setup phase experience was good."
"Its key strength lies in securing and centralizing code repositories."
"The tool's UI is better."
"Bitbucket lets me create new projects in a few clicks and check out files in a seamless and integrated manner."
"The most valuable feature of Bitbucket is its issue management."
"We can watch the newly implemented code. So it's quite nice to organize the teams to see what part of the work is done and what part of the code is already old or new. It is very good for that kind of management."
"The most valuable feature of Bitbucket is its capabilities."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"The product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines."
"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."
"The product is easy to maintain."
"It is an amazingly stable solution."
"Bitbucket Server is easy to use. You can use other applications to access it, or you can use it to access the internet. You can use solutions, such as Sourcetree, which is free, and put it on your development system and use it to do the check-in, checkouts, and those type of operations. It is nice, but some other developers may agree."
"I believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"The most valuable feature of the Bitbucket Server is its ease of management. The solution is easy to manage once we migrate and set up the data. The solution offers a fast code push feature."
"Bitbucket's usability and integration with other tools could be improved somewhat. My other issue is that Bitbucket, GitHub, GitLab, and all the other ones use slightly different jargon for the same things. They should come up with a standard language for all these tools."
"Fine tuning for procedures and features related to analytics and code validation is needed."
"Even with the automation, we've had some situations where we've had mistakes. They've integrated things into the wrong place, so there's a fairly steep learning curve."
"I would like to see the tool's desktop version."
"The scalability could be improved."
"Bitbucket could improve search and indexing capabilities. There is only basic searching available. There is only the ability to index the main branch but not the subbranches. The search capabilities are dodgy."
"There is room for improvement in the workflow. Other similar tools offer automation and more streamlined workflows, which Bitbucket currently lacks."
"I would like to see the integration with some of the cloud service providers improved."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"It would have been better to use Bitbucket Server if it had something similar to the concept called GitHub Actions since it allows GitHub to provide seamless integration of CI/CD pipelines."
"At the moment, there are not many details on how to proceed with the troubleshooting if one of the users faces an issue with the product."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"The product's initial setup phase is complex."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive."
"Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time."
Bitbucket is ranked 1st in Version Control with 42 reviews while Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 21 reviews. Bitbucket is rated 8.4, while Bitbucket Server is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitbucket writes "It's a good solution for storing code, but the usability and integration could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Bitbucket Server writes "An easy to use solution that works as a code repository for developers and helps them merge changes ". Bitbucket is most compared with AWS CodeCommit, GitHub, Atlassian SourceTree, IBM Rational ClearCase and Liquibase, whereas Bitbucket Server is most compared with Atlassian SourceTree, AWS CodeCommit and GitHub. See our Bitbucket vs. Bitbucket Server report.
See our list of best Version Control vendors.
We monitor all Version Control 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.