We performed a comparison between Bitbucket and Git based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Version Control solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Bitbucket's most valuable feature is the web interface, which is useful compared to other tools, has a lot of features, and is intuitive."
"Bitbucket is feasible and friendly compared to Visual Studio DevOps on the Microsoft platform."
"BitBucket is a reliable and user-friendly product."
"The product's most valuable feature is output backup."
"The solution is easy to use. If I need to check out my latest code or I need to send my local code to the depositories it is simple. Overall it is has been a good experience from my side using this solution."
"Code check in and code version control."
"The initial deployment is rather straightforward and only takes 30 minutes to an hour."
"It is easy to write code and store it in the central repository."
"The most valuable feature of Git is its reliability and user popularity."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...Since I am a very simple user of the tool, its scalability is good for me."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the branch management functionality."
"I use the solution for website management."
"Git is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is having access to the local country repository even if we have problems with distance access."
"The product is easy to use."
"Bitbucket should consider having a CI/CD if they don’t have it already."
"The installation of Bitbucket on our server was not as easy as other Atlassian products, so it is something that can be improved."
"Bitbucket could improve its security. For example, the user access security could improve."
"There is room for improvement in the workflow. Other similar tools offer automation and more streamlined workflows, which Bitbucket currently lacks."
"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."
"Bitbucket's stability isn't flawless. It has crashed on me occasionally, but I haven't yet lost anything after a crash."
"I would like to see the security logs option on the tool directly. The current way to work with security logs is through an email protocol."
"I think the developers are constantly working on improving the pull requests support."
"The solution works perfectly fine so far."
"Git is mostly command based and needs to have a helpful user interface."
"The main problem for me is the frequent upgrades in the solution because every other upgrade is a minefield. When you do the upgrade, there is always something that doesn't work."
"In our company, we sometimes feel the need to have certain kinds of reports, but we never get those customized reports in Git's dashboard."
"The solution could improve by having more customization."
"The GUI needs to be improved."
"Git's user interface could be improved."
"The tool is complicated for a beginner. You need to have some training to use it. It is also hard to find a parameter."
Bitbucket is ranked 1st in Version Control with 42 reviews while Git is ranked 4th in Version Control with 35 reviews. Bitbucket is rated 8.4, while Git is rated 8.6. 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 Git writes "A stable solution that can aid its users in maintaining all application developments ". Bitbucket is most compared with Bitbucket Server, AWS CodeCommit, GitHub and Atlassian SourceTree, whereas Git is most compared with Atlassian SourceTree, Canonical Bazaar, IBM Rational ClearCase and Surround SCM. See our Bitbucket vs. Git 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.