We performed a comparison between Jira and Microsoft Azure Devops based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Overall, users of both products seem to be satisfied with the solutions. Microsoft Azure Devops has slightly higher ratings because it is easy to deploy.
"The most valuable features of this solution are workflow and reporting."
"I like that all of the team members on an agile team can use it. No one is in a separate application."
"Perfect for keeping track of large amounts of bugs, tasks queries and releases for fixes."
"All of the tracking features are the most valuable because it allows me to see where we stand today and every day."
"When combining Jira with Bitbucket, you have the possibility to ensure continuous integration and other functions which is highly appreciated by our software development team."
"Jira queries can be used for different types of deployment automation processes."
"I have found Jira to be scalable."
"It was easy to use. The consultants that we had on board were familiar with it. So, obviously, having a community that had used it before or was familiar with it was a positive thing."
"I like the cloud infrastructure of Microsoft Azure DevOps."
"The initial setup is quick and easy."
"The tool's most efficient feature is the integration of its services in one place. It is an easy-to-use product that improves productivity. Microsoft Azure DevOps is also user-friendly. Its documentation is clear and can be found on Google."
"We can track everything from the requirements stage to the production stage."
"There are great automation tools."
"It's very user-friendly, and the documentation is good. The most valuable feature is backlog item creation, where we pick features and other things. The burndown chart created for projects to be maintained by the development teams is also useful."
"Fields can be customized and the reporting is good."
"Before using this solution, we had to deploy our applications, from pre-production to production, manually."
"In JIRA, it's a bit complex in terms of what advanced search queries we use. Sharing them is also a problem. Because TFS is on the cloud, we can easily save that query and share it with our team members."
"There needs to be more integration and connectivity."
"In Jira, say on the team, no matter the methodology, it doesn't matter what I'm practicing, if I am using the tool for a while and I've compiled some sort of history. If I want to change my workflow, say my team is today using to-do in progress done, and tomorrow, I decide I want to use to-do in review and done, and I apply that new workflow, I have just now effectively lost all of my histories in terms of reporting."
"When you first start to use the interface, it is confusing."
"What could be improved is the migration between the testing and production environments. This could be automated somehow as the manual transfer of certain workflows and functionalities is very time consuming right now."
"The reports in Jira can be improved, especially for test reports. I find it difficult to customize and integrate for different testing purposes."
"A more organized hierarchy is important. Reporting and JQL create issues for me. They do not completely cover the reporting part that I need to report in terms of my capacity to plan. In the same token, there is no record at this very moment to provide me with one export with epics story points, tasks, or issues and their sub-tasks at the same time."
"Integration with some of the automation tools could be improved."
"It is not that intuitive. Sometimes, it is hard to find some of the functions. I would like to have an old-fashioned menu structure to be able to easily find things. Its environment setup is not very good. They should improve the way it is set up for different screens and make it easier to find functionalities and maintain team members."
"Being more technology-agnostic through ease of integration would be beneficial."
"I think that the integration is to some extent, immature."
"I would like to see new features added."
"I think that they have some menus there that are not very well placed."
"Reporting could be better. We would like to see how many applications are onboarded in DevOps and in which phase they are. We would like to know for how many applications we have done only the repository, but we have not yet done the build pipeline or deploy pipeline. Currently, there is no such report. We have to figure it out ourselves. There is no way to check how many applications are completing their build pipelines, how many applications are completing their deploy pipeline, how many are ready to use, and how many pipelines are working."
"There is only one key area of improvement for me. The new imaging thing is that there is DevOps, where security is important because it is always lasting. So, to integrate security in our DevOps, that would be nice."
"The active directory password system needs some improvement because many times the password for the active directory expires before the set time."
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 127 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Allows us to deploy code to production without releasing certain features immediately and agile project management capabilities offer resource-leveling". Jira is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software, Polarion ALM and TFS, whereas Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, TFS, Rally Software, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management and OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our Jira vs. Microsoft Azure DevOps report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.