We performed a comparison between Atlassian Confluence and IBM FileNet based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Liferay and others in Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals)."It is stable and reliable."
"As for valuable features, the team management features help us to share information very easily."
"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"
"It's easy to use and you can create all types of pages."
"It is easy to use."
"Great shareable and co-editing features."
"Many people enjoy its zero learning-curve."
"A simple tool for developers to write and record team decisions explaining the product that they are creating."
"The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions."
"Streamlined our business processes."
"It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it."
"It improves the time when providing customer service to our constituents."
"I have found that it scales well."
"It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage."
"The important features to me are that it is stable, scalable, and the integration between this platform and the other platforms is very good."
"We shred all our paper and no longer need the cabinet space. We used to have about six to 12 inches of cabinet space per customer, which is now gone."
"The standard table capability is substandard and virtually unusable."
"Atlassian Confluence could improve how information is shared outside our company. We had some negative experiences with the rights we have with our information when sharing it within Atlassian Confluence and with other teams outside the company. It's due to the limitations on the rights we have on the export capabilities. We don't have sufficient rights to do so."
"When we have a project that we don't want to share with everybody but want people to know that it exists, there is no way to do this in Confluence. When a project is not shared, people cannot see that it exits."
"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."
"There needs to be a flexible pricing model, where we can pick and choose services and customize our pricing model."
"An area for improvement in Atlassian Confluence is encouraging more vital interaction among the project members or users involved. I was researching a tool that could be used for better interactions offline among users on a specific topic or discussion. That feature would make Atlassian Confluence better."
"The price could be improved. I have heard that certain adjustments would be made in 2024 and that it will then be more expensive, but I don't know the specifics."
"The product is considered expensive."
"In terms of functionality, what customers might be looking for is a little more in terms of native-records retention. Records Management is an add-on product. If there were just a little more of that built into the core functionality, that would be helpful."
"The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless."
"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."
"The installation and configuration to start up needs expert level knowledge."
"We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."
"I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly"
"I would like to see Azure AD added."
"Programmers have to translate user needs into IBM FileNet, which causes misinterpretations."
Atlassian Confluence is ranked 2nd in Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) with 99 reviews while IBM FileNet is ranked 6th in Enterprise Content Management with 94 reviews. Atlassian Confluence is rated 8.2, while IBM FileNet 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 IBM FileNet writes "A document management system that helps in document digitalization and workflow management". Atlassian Confluence is most compared with Microsoft Teams, Microsoft OneDrive, Office 365, SharePoint and Zendesk, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Documentum, OpenText Extended ECM and IBM ECM.
We monitor all Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) 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.
