I don’t like Jira any longer, too. Slow and overloaded. It feels ancient. So, what are some good alternatives you use?
Why Jira Sucks
21–30 of 530 posts
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#22I hate Jira because every company I've worked for that uses it is a feature factory. But maybe that's just me.
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#23Every bullet point says "Missing...", but I feel like the main issue about Jira is that it has waaay to many features, and that it's super slow! The only bullet point I do agree with, is that Jira is missing an easy (or IMHO a minimalist / simple) interface. The tool is a mess, and the people using it are probably also using it in the wrong way, making the whole situation way worse. Don't get me wrong, I like Jira to…
If you want something that is simple use kanban-board like trello, github, an excel spreadsheet or whatever.
The complexity comes from the demand of Jira's paying professional customers.
Eventually Jira will grow too complex and bane the way for simpler tools probably of a different paradigm. Much like how Jira replaced things like HP Quality Center or the tools of Rational Unified Process.
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#24All I want from Jira is to allow me to use Markdown.
The new rich text editor still confuses me when it comes to newlines and quote blocks, in months since it's been gradually rolled out, I still can't remember if it's Shift+Enter or Enter to end the quote block and what kind of newlines work with quotes, if it's the selected text or a hidden paragraph that quotes are applied to and so on. Just let me edit the raw markdown as before or expose the underlying markup model when editing.
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#25They programmed it in Java, so its performance is sad
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#26is it ethical to link this without linking 'why skype is bad' by rms?
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#27Every bullet point says "Missing...", but I feel like the main issue about Jira is that it has waaay to many features, and that it's super slow! The only bullet point I do agree with, is that Jira is missing an easy (or IMHO a minimalist / simple) interface. The tool is a mess, and the people using it are probably also using it in the wrong way, making the whole situation way worse. Don't get me wrong, I like Jira to…
I was feeling the same way. Maybe we can get a Steve Jobs of agile development and create the "Iphone of Software Development Management Software". What I (drunkenly) mean is that the customer might not always know best when it comes to UX, especially when your early adopters/feedback providers are human management nerds.
Have you tried Linear[0]? It's a well-designed, streamlined tool similar to JIRA.
[0]: https://linear.app/
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#28Great article. As you are likely not native English, just as a tip you can actually simplify a lot of statements by removing the word ‘the’. As one example: > When the users need the features from Jira and request them to configure the plugins for many application scenarios, which contribute to the overall complexity of UIs. Becomes > When users need features from Jira they request plugins, which contributes to UI co…
Are both equally correct?
The first has incorrect use of the definite article (the users, the features), but to be honest it’s less about specific grammar syntax/rules and more about making writing easier to understand and more concise.
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#29Great article. As you are likely not native English, just as a tip you can actually simplify a lot of statements by removing the word ‘the’. As one example: > When the users need the features from Jira and request them to configure the plugins for many application scenarios, which contribute to the overall complexity of UIs. Becomes > When users need features from Jira they request plugins, which contributes to UI co…
Are both equally correct?
Second is preferred.
When you say “need the features”, that immediately makes me think “which features?” because it reads as if you are referring to some previously mentioned features.
Re: Why Jira Sucks
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
The interface used to be simpler and less in the way of getting things done. Then they added personas, UX and tried to "help" the user. You now need more clicks to accomplish the same stuff while information is more hidden than before also. There's no way to cater every possible workflow without feature bloat. However, the space is ripe for simpler, more accessible solutions that supports work across multiple project…
It's not for engineers. Or anyone in particular. They're building to check off boxes in order to sell top down to C-level execs that never touch the stuff. Atlassian products are all like this, and each one is a horrible trash fire. Confluence is the worst wiki product I've ever used. Gross syntax, slow, clunky plugin system, awkward permissions. Install MediaWiki and be done with it. Bitbucket is slow and feels like…
Agree with this. My hypothesis is that they’re just ridiculously slow at adopting newer UX principles. The product was successful initially (good for them) and it was just never made much better.
The horrible response times and user hostile UI is shocking, especially if you look at their competitors. It gets in your way all the fucking time. But because they’re embedded in enterprises they don’t need to change much. It’s a big mess.