Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

atlassian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 305 posts

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#61

Post by Hamuko »

jjuhl wrote: post #54
Hamuko wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Atlassian's Terms of Service is that most of their end-users are not paying for the software and do not really care if they violate an agreement they were either forced to make or which someone made on their behalf.

Be honest; noone cares about (or reads) ToS agreements.

No one cares to read any Terms of Service agreements, but I think Atlassian's products face another tier: not caring to adhere to them at all.

I'd personally find it pretty funny to go up to my boss and tell them I can't read my Jira tickets because Atlassian banned my account. Or would they ban the entire organization instead? Either way, hilarious.

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#62

Post by ratww »

confluence_perf wrote: post #41
burnthrow wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on, everything is slow and you know it.

We have certainly heard from some customers that agree that 'everything' is slow, but we've also heard from other customers saying they have no problems. We would love to fix "everything", and we have some longer term projects focused on this -> However, "everything" fixes seem to be a more incremental boost and also take longer time to complete. If you have any feedback about "specific" items that are the most frust…

> but we've also heard from other customers saying they have no problems

Can I suggest following up with those customers to see if and how they're using the product, what's their computer configuration, if there's anything special about them?

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#63

Post by uncledave »

las3r wrote: post #33

Both cloud and on prem user here. Both systems are slow, hardware doesnt scale. Simply browsing issues easily takes 2 to 5 seconds per click. Confluences is okay i guess, just the slowness is annoying. That, and trying to to format text properly. When youve worked with azure devops or github before, atlassian tooling is really a blast from the past.

Yep. I was a company official JIRA and Confluence on prem JVM restarter, mail queue unclogger and schema unfucker for 5 years. When they moved it to Cloud it was the best day of my life because it wasn’t my problem any more even though the performance was even worse.

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#64

Post by TomVDB »

confluence_perf wrote: post #28
dalrympm wrote: post #22

I'm curious, I'm a Cloud customer and I can tell you that the service is incredibly slow even for a small scale setup (2 Jira Projects and 3 Confluence Workspaces). There's an insane amount of network requests seemingly for mouse tracking. By telling everyone here, that Atlassian Cloud products are insufferably slow, am I violating the ToS? I was actually thinking about doing a write up on the issues I've had but thi…

Sorry to hear it's been a frustrating experience. I'm a PM for Confluence Cloud and we're always trying to make it better. Would you be willing to share more specifics, such as: - Pages with content X are the slowest - Trying to do A/B/C is annoyingly slow - etc ? (edit: looks like HN is severely limiting my reply rate so apologies for delays) We're trying to focus on frustrating pages/experiences rather than number…

If you honestly need details and specifics when Confluence has always been a slow mess to the point of being unusable, then maybe Atlassian needs a PM in charge of performance metrics first and foremost?

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#65

Post by runlevel1 »

rhencke wrote: post #38
igetspam wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Know what would be great? Markdown support. The WYSIYG is full of bad assumptions and has been forever. In the beginning, we could at least opt out but that's long gone. I actively encourage companies I consult for to use anything but confluence because it seems to be designed specifically for the lowest common denominator with no allowance for people who work faster with a keyboard.

How does this relate to the performance issues being discussed?

In the case of Confluence specifically, it makes the cost of experimentation a lot steeper.

Confluence's WYSIWYG editor will often make changes that can't be reversed with "undo" -- especially those involving indentation. Copy-paste frequently screws up its formatting as well.

So if you don't want to risk losing lots of work, you have to make many smaller changes. With each change taking a few seconds, it adds up quickly.

If it was markdown or some extended set of it, that wouldn't be a problem.

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#66

Post by ratww »

rhencke wrote: post #38
igetspam wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Know what would be great? Markdown support. The WYSIYG is full of bad assumptions and has been forever. In the beginning, we could at least opt out but that's long gone. I actively encourage companies I consult for to use anything but confluence because it seems to be designed specifically for the lowest common denominator with no allowance for people who work faster with a keyboard.

How does this relate to the performance issues being discussed?

Don't know if that's what OP was thinking, but a WYSIWYG editor is normally slower than a plaintext editor, so it could make the product more bearable.

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#67

Post by coredog64 »

runlevel1 wrote: post #57
confluence_perf wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to hear it's been a frustrating experience. I'm a PM for Confluence Cloud and we're always trying to make it better. Would you be willing to share more specifics, such as: - Pages with content X are the slowest - Trying to do A/B/C is annoyingly slow - etc ? (edit: looks like HN is severely limiting my reply rate so apologies for delays) We're trying to focus on frustrating pages/experiences rather than number…

Navigation is sluggish across the board in both Confluence and Jira. Not just the Cloud service, the self-hosted versions are also painfully slow no matter what resources you throw at them. That makes the other UX issues worse because the feedback loop has so much lag.

Good news about the self-hosted version being slow: Pretty soon you won’t be able to run self-hosted Atlassian products.

Re: Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues

#70

Post by trevorishere »

icameron wrote: post #32
simon1ltd wrote: post #3

Nothing says “great product” like a ToS that bans you from discussing the problems. I self-host a confluence install, and it’s performance is poor even with a good sized VM and absolutely zero other traffic to it.

Yep Confluence is an amazingly overly complicated thing! I had it on modern windows server that boots up in 60 seconds. From that time, confluence starting up take no less than 10 minutes before it responds to web requests. Fortunately we switched to Teams this year, no more exorbitant confluence renewal fees and clueless support.

SharePoint Server is an absolute beast with a bunch of legacy code yet it has no issues being responsive as soon as it JITs (which can take ~30 second so or so after an App Pool startup).

SPO is also responsive (the last thing to load is typically the SuiteNav which doesn't impact working with the site/content).

I'm not sure why a company like Atlassian would have these persistent performance issues.

Post reply on HN