My org configured the local Jira to look like an oldschool forum: no dynamically loading content (which also means I need to refresh for newest comments), links are really just plain links, and I need to manually write markup for proper comment formatting.

It's fast and works really well compared to the guest Jiras that we sometimes use for external projects. My only gripe is that Jira's markup language is pretty bad.

That’s your org’s fault for insisting on hosting their own instance.

Cloud Jira is secure and performant now, but some companies refuse to use it for made up security reasons, which is just one more item on the list of self inflicted wounds that make Jira suck.

The theme of both your comments is that if anything is a problem with Jira, it’s all the organization’s fault because they have set it up poorly.

I would suggest that it’s 100% Atlassian’s fault that their product is so frequently poorly set up. They’ve basically abandoned their responsibility to design a good product in the name of customizability.

Sure, you can blame Atlassian for the confusion, I don’t work there or care about them as an org, and it’s a fair criticism.

But when people blame Jira itself, I tend to roll my eyes, as it’s a completely self solvable problem.

I haven't found the performance of cloud jira anything to write home about!

I'm sure web apps don't actually have to perform like shit, but it seems like they always do.

Hahaha. No, we use Jira Cloud, and the bills are astronomical, for still shit performance.

Then you have strange firewall or QoS issues on your network, as I know of multiple Fortune 100 companies using Jira cloud without this issue.

It's not the network that's the bottleneck, but the Javascript-bloated mess of the frontend.

edit: That isn't to say that Jira and Confluence are the only offenders. They aren't even the worst. Slack/Teams/Rocket.Chat are all just as bad and make me consider switching to a career without computers on a regular basis.

That’s kind of my point; all the tech you list here doesn’t have horrible lag, and aren’t generally even close to so bad they’d make someone want to switch careers.

So if it’s not them…

That’s kind of my point; all the tech you list here doesn’t have horrible lag, and aren’t generally even close to so bad they’d make someone want to switch careers. So if it’s not them…

That's a lot of denial. Have you considered that Atlassian knows that these are Fortune 100 companies with contracts that would make Larry Ellison weep and therefore slap them on their biggest instances because hardware cost is negligible (as well as having dedicated employees to fix specific problems for them), and that _maybe_ the same amount of work isn't done for <generic company paying default prices for Jira Cloud>

Maybe!

But I doubt it. I run engineering at a b2b SaaS and specifically dedicating resources the way you're describing is not something I'd consider at the level Atlassian is at, especially considering there are people like you lurking out there.

Maybe! But I doubt it. I run engineering at a b2b SaaS and specifically dedicating resources the way you're describing is not something I'd consider at the level Atlassian is at, especially considering there are people like you lurking out there.

Their Cloud ToS forbids sharing performance information (section 3.3i), which in its most generous interpretation is meant to avoid the type of speculation in this thread. https://www.atlassian.com/legal/cloud-terms-of-service