I haven't used Jira for 5y so my opinion might be off, but I think it's a case where the tool takes the blame for the organization that buys it. Jira is extremely configurable, it simply becomes a materialization of bureaucracy and micromanaging. If you remove Jira, bureaucracy wilk still be there.
Aside from the argument that it's enabling terrible practices — which I could go on about for a good few hours — the tool itself is awful. I mean it's criminally bad at what it even tries to do, putting aside the fact that what it tries to do is wrong in the first place.
I want to change an "issue" to an "epic", and I'm presented with a workflow more becoming a database migration, which of course, isn't far from the truth. They've made their poor design choices your problem, so when you want to do something like this, what you're actually presented with is all the complexity of migrating data from one database table to another with different fields.
That's just one example, but I can tell I'm ranting already. I hate Atlassian _so fucking much_ though.
It says enough that it's not marketed to people who do the work, but those who "manage" their work, where no management is needed. May it and Atlassian burn in hell for a long time. Amen.
And that's the problem with Jira. It tries to be everything to everyone. Allowing every middle manager to hand craft their own little snowflake dev process. That's almost always a bad idea.
JIRA is still awful separately from that just in terms of implementation quality. It's SO slow. Just clicking around opening issues has a noticable delay, and typing in the textboxes to edit issues is laggy!
Potential users are not going to register for an account in order to determine if your app is the rare and possibly mythical great task management app, or if it is instead the statistically far more likely not great task management app. You know and believe it is in the great category. Potential visitors do however need to be shown that greatness.
Your landing page needs to communicate enough value for visitors to be willing to invest their time in it. Your "Get started" button seems to offer the promise of revealing that value, under the possibly over-optimistic assumption that the visitor will immediately detect that greatness without it being explained or shown to them first, something that only happens in the most extreme of cases where the greatness is immediately obvious in the first few seconds of interacting with an app, and which is rarely the case for task management apps.
Yes, very hard to show the greatness in a few seconds, I agree.
Will improve the onboarding and the landing, for sure.
Btw, you don't have to 'register', just click on login, you will receive a magic link in your inbox, then all of AJIR's feature are open to use for free.
Incredibly small and unhelpful nitpick about the landing page.
Under "Only what you need to manage products" you have 6 boxes that describe features. The boxes are. in 2 rows of three for my screen size. The second row's secondary text is 2 lines long for the first 2 boxes and 3 lines long for the last box. Because of the box size, the last box is taller and the grid is thus uneven. Either making the copy in that box 2 lines long (maybe lose the words "your code") or setting a min height on the boxes or something would make the grid even.
Other than that, and much more importantly, I have no idea why I'd use this over any other project management tool. Maybe a feature comparison between the major players would help. Or tell me why you're simpler, faster, more novel, etc than other options.
I also don't know your pricing. It says "Try for free". What does "try" mean? Does "trying" end? Then what happens?
I was tired of using JIRA, Confluence and co so I built AJIR as a better alternative to manage product building.
The platform is built around 3 main object types: Product, Feature and Task. The first two are here to stay and organized as tree. You can document each of the Products and Features, so your documentation is always organized following the exact same hierarchy (that you can change anytime, by the way).
Tasks are here to come and go as they are executed.
Around these 3 main objects, you will find different features to track time, time sheet automatically, build roadmaps, track budget consumption, and more.
You can track commits, tags as well (Github integration).
AJIR also has an API that you can use to track bugs, user feedbacks and help request. AJIR's API can also be used to track deployments of your apps/products across different environments.
Looking for users and feedbacks ! It's free.
I plan to improve AJIR of course, but also to build better documentation on how to use it, as well as a few Looms to present different features and use cases.
If it were possible to go back in time, I'd advise testing that the "get started" button works before posting this.
Given that it's already posted to HN, fixing that button so it shows a page containing something other than the words "jobs" and "home", and/or so the links under those words do something other that point back to the same page, should probably be top priority.
The get started button successfully redirects to another page, but the page it directs to is not useful because all it contains are apparently self-referential links to jobs and home. There is no way to actually "get started"
Is there any plan for Jira Server/Cloud import? I think the major roadblock for a lot of people moving away from those platforms is that most competitors either don't support project import at all, or don't correctly deal with custom fields, workflows, etc.
We've switched from JIRA to Linear.app more than year ago, and never looked back. With JIRA our team members were getting blocked in the flows quite a bit, now with linear we're much more efficient.
Interesting, I looked at Linear as well and no doubt, it's a very polished product with food UX/UI, etc.
But still is very much Issues oriented, no ?
What i wanted to do with AJIR is create something that has both Task management and Product/Features documentation in a well integrated way, i.e. having a documentation that is 'self-organized' in the very same hierarchy than your Products/Features tree.
I am about to open source a web-app in the field in about two months.
Been in the making for 7 years, is in use by famous big-corps for few years already.
Bi-directional Jira integration built-in.
I am not mentioning the name of the tool simply because the landing page is really not where I want it to be at the moment
If you are looking for a solution in the field can DM me and I'll give you access to the code before we complete all the open source preparation.
Our speciality is that the tool solves both the communication problem (Trello, Asana) and the planning problem (MS Projects). Typical client will have 50-400 active users.
Ok I'm not here to defend Jira, I suffer with the rest of you.
But something that got me off my high horse ... someone said Jira is a mirror and you are a corporation. When you look into it, and you think it's ugly, you're looking at your own red tape reflecting back at you.
It doesn't forgive all of it. It just makes me pause a second.
I'd guess it's a separate server, hence the subdomain. I have a similar issue with a client project where I'm building an AI version of an app that started out being non-AI despite having AI in the URL.. so now the URL is ai.example.ai...
Since email is used for authentication, how would you want the system to consider you as a user without keeping the email ? Come on, be serious for 2 minutes.
The concept of tying email addresses to user accounts came Google to better track their users. Of course thankfully taken over from everybody in the industry.
Especially when you offer a "free" trial for your software you should not ask your users to pay with their data. Even first before they see what they'll get for in exchange.
You literally ask me to pay the price first before I see the product
Like I said, since the auth system is based on magic links sent to your email adress, how would you go about retrieving your user without storing your email ?
Using email addresses as login ids is a bad design because makes it virtually impossible for your users to change their email addresses. Talk to people who used their office email and later changed their employer, people who want to abandon gmail for privacy or other reasons, or whose email provider simply went out of business.
I would be surprised if your app would have a "change your email/login" function implemented.
I click on 'Jobs' and am taken to a completely blank page.
The only other link is 'Login'.
Can I suggest you provide more user feedback as to what they're expected to do to break out of this unhelpful first experience?