221–230 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are discontinuing the “Server” product, but continuing “Data Center”… which has more functionality at a higher price, suitable for bigger orgs. You might already be using Data Center, and be unaffected by the new announcement.
It’s surprising to me how many commenters on this post didn’t even read the announcement. When you see that their Data Center offering isn’t going anywhere, it doesn’t seem dire at all.
This sounds like a terrible move and will probably force all medium-size organizations I work with to ditch Atlassian. We have the technical know-how to administer data center versions of their products, but we can’t do shit if they force potential customers to pay for a minimum of 40 000 USD for a license per product. Many of these orgs have multiple Atlassian products so this will probably end up doubling costs on…
I agree. this is a jump-the-shark move. I've worked with confluence and jira and they are not as good as other products - but we can put any kind of confidential data in them. Everybody likes sharepoint/google docs/slack way better.
Looking for a Confluence competitor with permissions, version tracking, templates, and search but don't feel like I have found a good alternative.
This sounds like a terrible move and will probably force all medium-size organizations I work with to ditch Atlassian. We have the technical know-how to administer data center versions of their products, but we can’t do shit if they force potential customers to pay for a minimum of 40 000 USD for a license per product. Many of these orgs have multiple Atlassian products so this will probably end up doubling costs on…
I agree. this is a jump-the-shark move. I've worked with confluence and jira and they are not as good as other products - but we can put any kind of confidential data in them. Everybody likes sharepoint/google docs/slack way better.
This sounds like a terrible move and will probably force all medium-size organizations I work with to ditch Atlassian. We have the technical know-how to administer data center versions of their products, but we can’t do shit if they force potential customers to pay for a minimum of 40 000 USD for a license per product. Many of these orgs have multiple Atlassian products so this will probably end up doubling costs on…
> If I was a Microsoft or another enterprise tech company I’d hire a thousand engineers tomorrow to develop a Jira/Confluence competitor before the grace period for server licenses ends. Microsoft already has GitHub that works fine as a Jira/Confluence substitute for technical people. Maybe this will be their call to make it more accessable.
But if you want to replace Confluence as the knowledge base for the business people, there's Sharepoint, which is better than massaging your genitals with broken glass, but not by much.
Data sovereignty means my 5,000 seat company will stop using it. Confluence and Jira were already a hard sell due to licence fees. Now Atlassian wants us to put our trade secrets on AWS or something? Not happening. At least they if we mess up security on a host inside our business it’s not the end of the world. edit: I don’t make the money decisions here, I am just a peon.
For 95% of companies, outsourcing your servers to the cloud is a drastic security improvement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are still selling their datacenter version.
The minimum seating for datacenter products is 500 users, with corresponding purchase and maintenance costs. It's simply not viable for small businesses who are unable to move to the cloud. For example, if my employer (for whom the use of cloud hosted service is simply not possible) wanted to keep using Atlassian products, moving to datacenter would cost us many thousands of dollars more per year in maintenance while…
This is a very typical argument CIOs faced when transitioning storage to cloud. The job threat to storage admins created a lot of FUD and slowed many migrations. Unfortunately, this happened with DB, storage, compute and software.
I wonder if there is a middle ground here where you can have a proxy service that can be run locally to augment and/or customize the product for a specific customer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I was going to switch anyway, I wouldn't switch to Azure DevOps Server, I'd switch to GitHub Enterprise. I don't think there's much of a future for Azure DevOps.
> I don't think there's much of a future for Azure DevOps. This is just... wow. Every Microsoft shop I've ever worked at defaults to Azure. You need a really good reason to use GCP or AWS for anything, and it's an uphill battle. They're already paying licensing fees to Microsoft, there are incentives and discounts to stay within the ecosystem. My current employer has GitHub Enterprise and we still use DevOps for a lo…
The amount of bugs i encountered is.. Bad. From not starting build agents, to stopped agents to hanging etc etc etc..
That said: i looooove the docker container concept for builders :)
My employer (large Fortune 500) recently "soft banned" Confluence and Jira, meaning groups already utilizing it can stay on it until our enterprise license runs out at the end of the yearly support contract. At first I thought it was really stupid decision as Confluence, at least, is fantastic product and Sharepoint/Notes (the enterprise replacement solution) is a horrid alternative. One of the admins said there were…