We performed a comparison between Atlassian Confluence and Symphony based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Social Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It seems highly scalable. There are 500 end users using this solution."
"A simple tool for developers to write and record team decisions explaining the product that they are creating."
"The integration's very good. You still have integration with lots of third party products, and it's very good."
"The most valuable feature is the accessibility from different sites for different colleagues and the search option."
"It is a very popular tool."
"The most valuable feature of Atlassian Confluence is the ability to access your files from anywhere."
"Pricing is not a problem."
"It's extremely intuitive."
"I found the RAM Commander module in Symphony to be the most valuable."
"The solution is user-friendly, and it is very good security-wise."
"The overall functions are good."
"Symphony and Laravel are the most comfortable frameworks for any developer. It is also lightweight."
"The entire product is good."
"When you are creating a table in Confluence, there is no tool to export it into Excel sheet for quick references. We can only export it as an a PDF file, but not into an editable file."
"RAM usage seems to be higher than it should be."
"The area that needs improvement is the search capability. It should have generalized capabilities."
"I have a couple of different pipelines that I work with. However, I'd like to see them displayed differently on the same dashboard. So, I would like to have a unified dashboard to view the different pipelines."
"The UX is a little bit all over the place."
"I think the couple of improvement areas would be around Markdown support and support for adding code."
"Some aspects of the drawing perspective could be improved. When we upgrade a design and make technical architecture drawings to publish, we still use Visio first and then copy and paste it. If this feature were available on Confluence, it would be a useful tool."
"It would be good if they can continue working towards making documentation and editing as quick and easy as possible. It has got a lot of capability, but I don't know how to use it. I don't find some of the things that intuitive. Sometimes, it doesn't seem obvious to me how to use it, but it is like learning any new tool. You actually need to get trained on the tool to get maximum out of it."
"To improve the situation, enhancing the functionality for integrating with other applications and addressing ticketing issues is crucial."
"The area that needs to be improved is modular asset management. When we are uploading the assets in bulk, it is not aligned."
"The solution is very expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"Compared to established vendors, it lacks user flexibility and customization, especially in the PM module."
"The solution needs to improve CI."
Atlassian Confluence is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Social Software with 99 reviews while Symphony is ranked 8th in Enterprise Social Software with 5 reviews. Atlassian Confluence is rated 8.2, while Symphony is rated 7.2. 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 Symphony writes "Makes tasks like network planning and performance monitoring much easier". Atlassian Confluence is most compared with Microsoft Teams, Office 365, Microsoft OneDrive, SharePoint and Zendesk, whereas Symphony is most compared with Microsoft Teams, Slack, Drupal and SharePoint. See our Atlassian Confluence vs. Symphony 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.
