Answering your questions on changes to server and Data Center

Viewing page 3 of 5

101 comments

Comment

This is incredibly awful.

We are a small team using an on-site local-only Server license. I understand that we bought the license and that means we can run it for perpetuity. However, not being able to pay a reasonable price for support means that we'll be switching as soon as we find a viable replacement. We cannot and will not expose our private data, processes, procedures to the internet nor can we trust you to be the data custodians for our data.

In short, no thanks.

Like • like this

The big challenges as I see them are 2 fold.

1) Data residency for customers smaller than the 500 minimum for data centre.

2) The reduced feature set of many plugins on Jira Cloud vs Server

For some customers, this will make continuing with Jira and Confluence a non-starter. Are there any plans to resolve these challenges, and if so, what are they?

Cheers

James

Like • like this

You forgot challenge 3: At least twice the price (DC) or more (Cloud).

Like • Dalectric likes this

Hi everyone! Has someone already found an alternative to jira / confluence? please advise

Like • like this

I'm currently looking into GitLab CE as it has a wiki and issue tracking.

Like • like this

I have replied earlier about my experiences moving from Bitbucket to Gitlab CE. This might be of interest to you, though I don’t use Jira/Confluence - being a home user/hobbyist

Like • Taylor Huston likes this

@derekkThanks, I read your post. Its less about the GIT repositories but more of the extra functionality that GitLab offers in conjunction that could potentially replace Jira as an issue tracker.

Not sure about Confluence but YouTrack sounds like a great alternative to Jira.

Like • like this

I would've preferred to stay with Atlassian; but since they force this, here's our list:

Crowd→Hub

JIRA→Youtrack

Confluence→XWiki

Bitbucket→Gitea

Bamboo→TeamCity

Like • like this

I am not familiar with Hub. A quick google game me a pretty generic list of results. Can you be slightly more specific? ;)

Like • Dalectric likes this

Sorry, I could have thought of that. I don't want to mention other companies here.

But when you look at YouTrack, you'll find Hub in its near vicinity.

Like • Dalectric likes this

@Jo Wilkes I suppose you can mention any kind of company here, because it very much looks like Atlassian does not want a certain kind of customer anymore: Those on-premise customers who are not DC with at least 10,000+ seats and not able to switch to cloud either.

Therefore I suppose Atlassian might not object too much to presenting alternatives for those customers (as we are one) here, since having an alternative will at the very least stop those customers from harassing Atlassian (to no avail, as their strategy very much seems pointed towards a completely different direction than "small customers with their own infrastructure"). ;)

Like • Dalectric likes this

@Jo Wilkes yep, we currently make some test migrations from Confluence to Xwiki. There's a good article about it in their FAQs.

Like • Dalectric likes this

Hi there,

I think the solutions to many complaints is very simple:

add smaller user tiers to DC with a reasonable price

To further sharpen your products and make the price more reasonable for small companies, you should add a restriction to the DC setup. E.g. for a licence size <500 users no multi-node-instance is allowed, everything must be a single-node instance (which is exactly what a server instance is more or less). I don't think there are a lot of use-cases where a company with 50 users needs a 8 node setup. There is not much traffic on these instance and a single node is enough. I think adding such a restriction inside the DC code could also be simple.

So for small companies / use cases you only have a "one node server" setup, for larger companies (>500 users) you could have a multi-node setup. This makes sense since these companies automatically have more traffic on their instances and need the scalability of a multi-node DC.

Like • like this

This is a fantastic idea:

Existing Server customers have access to a product that meets our needs at a reasonable price.
New Server customers have a growth model so they can "start in the garage" and work their way up to a large enterprise install, without having to risk a disruptive migration from Cloud->DC along the way.
Existing DC customers won't feel like Server customers are getting to buy the same functionality at a a lower price point than they had to pay.
Atlassian gets additional revenue streams on a product they already support.

Win/win/win/win...

...unless what a lot of us suspect is true: Atlassian really has no future interest in customer-installed software at all, but are keeping their DC versions around to milk their larger cash cow enterprise customers for all they're worth?

Like • like this

well you forgot one thing ... its about the money, not whats best for us.

Like • like this

...unless what a lot of us suspect is true: Atlassian really has no future interest in customer-installed software at all, but are keeping their DC versions around to milk their larger cash cow enterprise customers for all they're worth?

Further down this thread Alex found this link...

https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2020/10/30/atlassian-corporation-plc-team-q1-2021-earnings-ca/

...with the following quote from Scott Farquhar (emphasis mine):

Yes. Scott here. I'll take that. Look, I mean, what we've said for our customers is some of our largest customers are choosing to remain on data center because they have a longer time frame that they want to migrate, and we're continuing to invest in our data center product. Just a reminder for some of those who haven't read all the announcements, we end-of-life our server product, but our data center product continues to be something Atlassian builds upon and supports and continues to invest in.
Now that said, I have talked to a whole number of CIOs over the last three months from everything from regulated industries, banks, European customers. And every single one of those CIOs have a plan to move to our cloud. They are -- and whether they're in a regulated industry or a European customer, and it's just a matter of when. And so, our data center product is going to be critical in making sure those customers are supported over the time frame for migration. But we expect that all our customers will migrate to cloud over the medium term.

So investors are being told that the Data Center products are dead-end software and the CEO has been speaking to customers about how to migrate away from it, but on this thread the Atlassian Team is recommending we migrate to Data Center at great financial expense.

It seems like Atlassian is no longer dealing with us in good faith.

Like • like this

@Bryan Mayo @Stephen Sifers @Cameron Deatsch @Andy Heinzer @Earl McCutcheon

Someone needs to answer for this. You are telling us all that data center isn't going anywhere, but your earnings call tells a different story.

What is happening with data center? We will not accept wishy washy answers. We need firm answers, because you are telling us one thing, and telling your investors something else.

EDIT AGAIN: Post was restored.

Like • like this

My previous comment appears to have been removed. :(

Hello @Andrew Pane ,

Normally a reply/answer is placed into moderation if it's picked up as spam. However, I am not seeing anything of yours listed as in moderation, I do see other posts from you still available within this thread.

To see if an item has been placed into moderation, please check your profile, and any post listed as "in moderation" has been placed into our spam queue for review.

Respectfully,
Stephen Sifers

@Stephen Sifers Then either something is wrong with your system, or we're being lied to. His post is quoted in my post because it disappeared. It definitely existed.

EDIT: The post was restored. Now please answer for this. This is insane. You can't tell your investors that ALL your customers are ready to move to the cloud, when you have so many here that are not.

Like • Dalectric likes this

@Alex Janes + @Andrew Pane

Thank you for bringing this to our attention, I double-checked and found the reply stuck in spam. I have since released it and am seeing the reply listed above. I apologize for the confusion here. If you happen to see another reply missing, let us know and we'll ensure it's removed from spam (assuming that's the cause).

Respectfully,
Stephen Sifers

@Stephen Sifers Great. Thank you.

Now stop ignoring the question, and answer us. I'm sorry if this is coming across as rude, but as Andrew said, we do not feel we are being worked with in good faith.

Like • like this

Wow... this is getting embarrassing, Atlassian. Show some dignity, for goodness' sakes and answer the question truthfully to your customers.

Like • like this

This is a dead horse. This horse is no more. He has ceased to be. It's expired and gone to meet its maker.

It's an ex-horse.

Seriously, look at what you are asking for: a lower-tier Data Centre is the server product. The one Atlassian nuked a couple of weeks ago. The stockholders loved it.

It's dead, Jim.

Like • Dalectric likes this

This is tragic for my users! After convincing hundreds of clients to use confluence over open source alternatives, atlassian has blown up our plans for the future. Native confluence has been terrible for responsive design and accessibility, but I’ve been able to manage these limitations by directly modifying on our instances on own servers, even integrating the US Web Design System. This type of customization will not longer be possible I would imagine, since it’s not available on cloud and I’d be surprised if data center allowed it, so I guess it’s time to move on. I feel like I’ve wasted the last 13 years of my career and squandered my credibility by recommending confluence to my many clients. Now I need to explain how we are to move to a new system... 2020 strikes again!

Like • like this

Hello to everyone at Atlassian and to everyone who has expressed their opinion concerning Atlassians' decision to change its server and Data Center offerings policies.

I am a Network and Systems Engineer in the IT Department of a major US college. One of my responsibilities is the installation, configuration, and maintenance of several Atlassian products. These products include three (3) instances of Atlassian Confluence Server 7.0.2 and one (1) instance of Atlassian Project Management Software 8.4.1.

All four of the above Atlassian products are fully licensed. Each of the Atlassian Confluence Server 7.0.2 instances are licensed for various numbers of users. The Atlassian Project Management Software is licensed for an unlimited number of users.

We have successfully used these applications for close to 15 years now.

Each of these applications have been specifically configured to accommodate our internal network needs as well as the needs of our users, both public and private. Our community has very specific configuration needs for each of the four Atlassian applications in particular the need to provide a secure environment.

Periodic updates of our Atlassian products are essential to maintaining functionality, addressing bugs, and ensuring a secure environment. The loss of the ability to perform these upgrades locally and to allow us to locally configure our Atlassian applications would be catastrophic! Any migration to cloud based instances (and the subsequent implementation of the stated server and Data Center changes) of our Atlassian applications would be unacceptable!

To add insult to injury it also looks like you are making drastic price increases for no reason other than to improve your bottom line and to bring the expectation that your cloud product pricing makes sense.

If Atlassian continues to insist that the "recently announced some changes to our server and Data Center offerings to sharpen our focus as a cloud-first company and deliver the world-class cloud experience you deserve" be put into effect would unfortunately cause our organization to altogether discontinue the use ALL Atlassian products and force our organization to seek alternative products to meet our needs!

Just making this announcement has reduced our trust in Atlassian greatly.

Like • like this

This hits the nail right on the head. We are using Server with 2000 seats licensed and a just a handful of plugins. Our only option for legal reasons would be Data Center, and we compared the prices: We would be looking at a 215% increase for _exactly_ the same functionality.

No words. No words.

Like • like this

What will be the effect of these changes on Academic Pricing?

Like • like this

It appears academic discounts are unchanged for datacenter and cloud. You will still receive the same Academic discount off Atlassian listed prices.

This is disappointing news and my company for one will be forced to go elsewhere after many years of happily using Atlassian products. It's a shame that for corporate reasons you've chosen to discontinue the products you were providing us, but I understand it, that's business, if maintaining Server is no longer profitable for you then you need to stop maintaining it.

What sticks in the craw is the way that instead of telling us how sorry you are and wishing us luck in our transitions you instead insist on patronising us by telling us that you know our businesses better than we do and that we actually want to stop using Server, that we want to move to the cloud, that the cloud is the right place for us. No! Don't add insult to injury by telling us what's right for our businesses. Don't tell us that you're "Accelerating our journey to the cloud, together", because we never had a journey to the cloud. We had Server and Server was what we wanted.

Like • like this

And as for telling us that our reasons for not using the cloud are "myths" and that you've "busted" them for us? Condescending much?

Like • like this

It's a shame to see that Atlassian has taken this wrong path for its customers.

My personal opinion, I want my money in my own pocket and I want my data on my own storage.
Now you are welcome to name me old school, but I heartly don't care if the cloud is the future for anyone.

Why we don't use cloud products in our company is very simple:
.) We are an authority and not allowed to give out our data.
.) Especially not if the data is stored outside of our country, or if there is just a suspicion that this can happen.
.) We only use Atlassian products for our internal purposes
.) We have no branches that, would have to access data from a head office via the Internet.
.) Regardless, of whether it is legally possible, we will most certainly not store our system documentation and tickets anywhere in the world.
.) So why should I save my own data anywhere in the world?
.) Why should I load my data over a slow internet connection when I have my servers in the house?
.) Why should I put extra load on my internet connection?
.) Why should you pay more for a worse solution?
.) And why the hell should I pay monthly fees, to be allowed, to access my own data?

The cloud may be funny for you, but the cloud just doesn't make sense for us.

To offer DC licenses that are so ridiculously expensive as an alternative, is simply a mockery.
And we're only talking about software that doesn't depict our core business, but rather serves as documentation.

If your customers are important to you, you continue to offer an affordable on-premise solution for the broader SME sector.
Offering data centers with a small number of licenses at the usual server license prices, has already been suggested by some.

I honestly hope, that Atlassian will find the spirit, that has been spoken of by many and that it will follow suit in its strategy.
You still have about 3 months to do it.

Like • like this

Well said

Like • adrian.simons likes this

@Bryan Mayo to get back to the original topic of this thread, the most asked question seems to be „Why (the hell)?“. Also, second most: „Will you reconsider and offer smaller/SME-affordable packages of DC? At least consider the option?“

There were several explicit and implicit answers to the first question. Any serious feedback to the second question?

Like • like this

We need answers to this. 500 user DC just does not work for our company. We get priced out and pushed out. The latter because we cannot utilise cloud.

Like • like this

@JBennettCloud is even more expensive than Data Center. Only if you just have a very few users this might make sense. For our 2000 seat Server setup all of this is just a 215% (DC) or just shy of 500% (Cloud) increase. Unspeakable!

Like • Dalectric likes this

@kk how are you able to contain moving to the cloud at 500% increase for 2,000 users? Did you include Jira Access to allow corporate authentication (part of Jira Server) and Jira Cloud Premium since 2,000 users and many years of data will require more than the allotted 250GB disk usage? Does it include the cost of subscriptions to third party add-ons that you already bought? I suspect the actual costs to be much higher.

Like • Dalectric likes this

@Eric TolliverMy statement was just the result of our research regarding "what are the options with Atlassian". We will surely _not_ go Cloud, and most likely also not "Data Center", because 215% times the current price for the exact same functionality just is not justifiable. Cloud would be a completely insane move, both from a functional perspective, and even more so from the price-point.

We are also researching how to leave the Atlassian ecosystem completely.

Like • like this

I would like to know about the plugin situation regarding this change from the cloud to the server. I have seen multiple community answers complain about limited functionality of the same plugins such as ScriptRunner (Adaptavist) not functioning the same as it does on server version vs the cloud. How is this going to be addressed? My company uses a lot of backend scripting in our Jira server version and I have seen the cloud versions strip a lot of this functionality away.

Like • like this

The company I work for has been an Atlassian customer for over 10 years and we love our Atlassian stack. As a company we see the advantages of the Cloud with the high availability, automatic failover, etc. However I want to pick our own Cloud solution and host the Atlassian software at a Cloud provider of my choosing so that I know where my data is stored and which can be accessed by using a custom subdomain of your own top level domain name.

The best way to address this is to do so with your wallet. That's why I've immediately stopped the auto renew of all our Atlassian licenses, one was due in 4 days. We'll reserve the money for the migration that most likely needs to take place.

Like • like this

The cloud will not work at all for our air-gapped SCADA networks. More than tripling our costs to use data center is also not going to happen. We also have Confluence and Jira Software in one Internet-connected network. The Gliffy plugin will more than quadruple in price for use in the cloud. For that cost, we could provide Visio to every technical user.

We do have some use of cloud services at our site. But, in those cases:

The cloud service has Fedramp certification.
The provider can do a better job.
It is cheaper to be in the cloud than on-prem.

That does not apply to the Atlassian server products. Our overhead for managing Confluence and Jira is quite low even though we upgrade frequently. I believe we have only opened 2 support cases in 10 years of product usage.

Both the cloud and data center have higher cost and reduced features. WTF? We will be cancelling a purchase of Service Desk due to this uncertainty.

Like • like this

Hello @Winston Holmes ,

Thanks for the feedback, and I would like to request that you take a look at and drop a comment with some more details about this on the following thread as well as possibly sign up for the champion feedback group noted, as we are using the thread to collect exactly this type of feedback and get more details on the impact to your specific organizational needs, specifically relating to Compliance needs:

To all Atlassian server champions - we want to hear from you

Additionally, I wanted to make sure you saw the details about the "Data Center loyalty discounts", that are in place to help offset the price increase of moving to Data Center for existing Server Customers.

As well as the "Cloud Roadmap" that contains recently shipped and future feature details relating to all things Cloud including Compliance related features planned for deployment, and this page has some details about the upcoming "FedRAMP Tailored" compliance for cloud, currently on track for a 2022 release; as well as a "FedRAMP Moderate" compliance for cloud on track for a 2023 release.

Regards,
Earl

Like • Dalectric likes this

@Earl McCutcheon Except these discounts are still a HUGE increase over the server price. As well, you are only giving us a year or two, before jacking the price way up even more on us.

We, as smaller and midsized organizations with only up to 10 users can't afford that jump. And we don't trust your cloud.

You have the feedback. Stop asking us for more. You have 4 pages of customers telling you that this won't work for them on this thread. Another 4 pages of the same on another thread...

You need to give us something better. Or that decrease you see on your maintenance earnings this quarter will not be matched by more cloud earnings the next few quarters, and your stock is gonna drop.

Like • like this

@Bryan Mayo Can you provide an Attestation of Compliance for your cloud products as it relates to the PCI-DSS? What are your plans for supporting server users migrating to cloud who need this to maintain PCI Compliance?

Like • like this

Bryan,

I hope it's clear to you that we don't all want your vanilla public cloud. We want to continue to run our private clouds! I work with a non-profit and we just spent a small fortune developing a custom application that runs on Confluence server and your decision hurts us tremendously. As the others have said, this appears to be a decision that mostly benefits you and leaves your client's who have invested in private clouds in a very difficult position. I feel what you are doing is morally wrong and even shameful. The public "cloud" will NEVER be a fit for many organizations who need far more flexibility that public cloud providers will be able to provide. I think that history will also show that the benefits of public clouds are massively overhyped. There is really nothing special about connecting to a server in your datacenter vs our datacenter and we lose an incredible amount of flexibility. I say this as someone with over 25 years of experience in IT and high tech. My suggestions is that you seriously reconsider this decision.

Regards,

John Newcomb

Like • like this

I agree with you. I also think that if you read the Atlassian boiler plate responses that it's clear they anticipated our responses and simply do not care about our position. They will continue to beat their drum on how life will be so much better for everyone moving into their infrastructure ignoring that we do not want it, never will.

Even if they reverse, its too late in my opinion. I think they won't continue development with on-premise versions and will continue with thier wonderful "Cloud" business model. The price increase is just too much, it feels like punishment for going against their new movement. I find it hard to believe they read our responses and come to a conclusion they got it wrong that we would just go along with moving into their cloud. Instead, it's more likely they don't want us on-premise customers anymore and want the future cloud customers only. Sorry Atlassian, I'm not giving you this control. All within the scheme and mantra of lowering development costs, support and consolidating what is to become a huge mess.

As others have said, other new options may come from this which will probably be better for us in the long run. I sure hope so.

I'll lastly say that this last year I've been de-clouding customers from the big three massively giving their freedom back of lower cost, security, performance and reliable uptime. All which degrade over time with them and "control panel experts" diluting important system architechture skills. But, thats for another conversation.

-G

Like • like this

he knows it. that why he`s pulling the trigger.

Like • Taylor Huston likes this

Therefore the only sustainable option seems to be to move to established open source solutions, luckily of which there are quite many for everything that Atlassian provided.

Like • like this

This is a killing partner decision from Atlassian, we have a 100% server clients and specially banks that will never use cloud product. The only solution seems to switch for another product and probably suppliers.

Our commercial speech was "if you don't trust the viability of the supplier, trust Atlassian and it's community, you will never be alone" seems like it exactly the opposite with this decision and it's really a choc for us.

Really hope that Atlassian will hear it's community and role back.

Like • like this

Really hope that Atlassian will hear it's community and role back.

I would start either looking into their Data Center offering or look at alternatives. They already confirmed that the on-premises server decision isn't going to change.

Like • like this

And Data Center will most likely follow suit, see my reasoning here.

Like • Dalectric likes this

If Bamboo server will continue to be in use until Bamboo Data Center is released, what happens to Bamboo server apps on Atlassian Marketplace. I read on our your site that, you won't be accepting any new server apps by May 1st. does that apply to Bamboo server apps too.

And if the deadline only apply to new Bamboo server apps, the existing ones can release version upgrades ??

Any answers would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Like • like this

Hi Atlassian. You seriously need to consider reverting this decision. My company is also another customer of yours and has been so for nearly a decade.

We have always used the Core and Server Edition and cannot use the cloud version due to various legal, regulatory and contractual/customer requirements. We also cannot justify paying the extortionate cost of Data Center (which I hear is due to increase) as we have a user base of roughly 100. We renew our maintenance every year but there is absolutely no way our business would stump up the extra for a 500 user licence which we do not need.

This is an example of a customer you are screwing over and I hate to say it but it feels like a way you can try to extract more money from your customers.

I do not believe this has been thought about in enough depth or do you not care about customers like us?

Like • like this

After reaching out to another vendor (they're a competitor, so I won't list the name) and asking about the longevity of their server product, this is the response they gave:

In our <Application> roadmap we include further development of both the Standalone and InCloud versions with the maximum feature parity. There are no plans to discontinue the <Application> Standalone version. We have a significant share of customers who are choosing to maintain <Application> on their servers, and their numbers are growing each month and the <Application> team is committed to delivering their best on our Standalone customers expectations.

Atlassian - This is what your response to your customers should look like.

We are all very aware that you wish you could re-invent yourselves today as a cloud SAAS provider and not deal with all of us troublesome people who want server software. Unfortunately, that's not how it works. We invested in you and supported you for 10+ years, and it's shameful to see how quickly you turn your back on us to go after "easier profits".

We hope you are happy with your younger, newer customers.

Like • like this

Well said.

-G

Like • like this

@DJX Could you reach out to me? I'm looking for alternative vendors, but I don't want to derail the conversation, nor promote a competitor on Atlassian's site.

Like • like this

@Alex Janes It rhymes with MetRains GlueTrack ;^)

Like • like this

@marth8880 I figured that, but I was secretly hoping there was yet another option now. :D

Like • like this

Yes, along with HitTab that's one of the ones we'll start trialling in our next cycle unless by then Atlassian have convinced us we'll have longterm access to DC for ballpark the same amount we're currently spending on Server.

Like • marth8880 likes this

I don't disagree with discontinuing server, but the pricing for data center needs to come back in line with the server pricing otherwise companies are going to start using inferior applications.

Jira is the industry standard, and the atlassian on-prem solutions work really well, are fast, and secure.

Many companies don't want to put all of our sourcecode, work in progress and documentation in an external cloud,

It's a shame to see atlassian pushing people to other solutions.

Like • like this

I feel that because they are now in a strong position in the industry, they have us hostage and can charge what they like......

Like • like this

Atlassian, I have a plan for you and us. If you're 100% sure about your cloud offerings then sell your Server and DC business to someone who is equally passionate about on-premises. I'm sure there will be plenty of buyers willing to maintain and nurture this community for many years forward.

Like • like this

How to get a quote with all licenses co-termed until 2024?

Somewhere during the storm of the past days, I've read a recommendation from Atlassian for those who want to (or need to) stay on Server that they can request a quote to extend license/maintenance for up to 24 or 36 months before 2-2-2021 at the current price.

I'd also like to co-term our licenses on that occasion if possible.

However, I can't find that message any more, but I need to know how and when to do this. Can someone help me out, please?

I'm asking here because I think the answer would be of general interest.

Thanks!

Like • Thomas Kofler likes this

I'm sure you used to be able to select 2 years when renewing on my.atlassian.com, but that doesn't appear to be an option now.

It might be worth talking to a local Atlassian partner to see if they can offer this.

Hi @Metin Savignano,

In order to request such a quote, please create a support ticket. You can do this if you are a billing or technical contact by going to https://support.atlassian.com/contact and then selecting the option "Billing, payments, and pricing", and the topic "Help with a quote or order". From there you can choose whether this is a renewal or a new purchase.

The more details you can provide there in regarding your existing products, such as each SEN you have for each product and/or the licensing level of each, the easier this should make it for you to obtain the quote you want here. Please also mention that you are looking for specific start/end dates in your request as this information will be needed in order to create the precise quote you desire.

Andy

Like • Tobias Ravenstein likes this

Hi @Andy Heinzer

Thank you very much for the instructions! I hope this will work as expected to keep us going for the next 3 years.

Metin

Hi @Andy Heinzer

I've tried your instructions, but my request has been rejected by the support team:

While there is an announcement of Server end-of-life, Atlassian still hasn't implemented a way to extend the quotes until 2024. We can only extend the license maintenance to a maximum of 24 months only.

So what is correct now?

Thanks
Metin

I was able to extend my license till 2024 by contacting the support team. Maybe they have changed their internal policy or it's a matter to whom you are talking.

Like • like this

That's interesting.

Could we get a clarification from the Atlassian team, please? @Andy Heinzer or anyone else?

Hi @Metin Savignano

Even if you cannot create a single new license for the entire 3 year term, all existing server licenses can still be renewed until at least February 2024.

You could certainly create a license today for a 12 or 24 month term, and then continue to renew that before it expires. Just understand that these server renewals won't be able to extend beyond that Feb. 2024 deadline. Also please understand that you will not be able to increase a server starter license level (user seats) after Feb 2021. This is because starter licenses are always limited to 10 users. In order to increase the user level for them, you would need a new license that will not be possible.

That last part is not correct. End of upgrades and downgrade is Feb 2, 2022.

Source: https://www.atlassian.com/migration/journey-to-cloud?tab=server-dates

@Andy Heinzer

Please clarify, because that's very scary.

@Vincent Roger my apologies. I saw that Metin has a 10 user starter license. Those licenses cannot have their user seats increased. The only way to increase those is to actually purchase a new license, which won't be possible for after Feb 2021 because no new licenses can be created after that date.

I have edited my previous post to try to make that more clear. Thanks for calling it out.

Andy

Why can the data location only be selected with the most expensive enterprise cloud plan?
Every other cloud vendor knows about GDPR and data location and you put it in the highest priced tier?

Additional, what's your statement about the Five Eyes (FVEY) alliance in which Australia takes part?

Like • like this

And data location is not solving the issue that Atlassian has access to this data as well as Amazon (AWS). According to the GDPR this is considered data processing as well. So even when all data resides in Germany laws in Australia, Great Britain and the U.S. apply to legal entity having access to all stored data.

The misconception that all compliance issues can be solved when selecting an european data center is just a big big myth. A myth that is told by non-compliant big-tech companies.

This whole "data location can only be selected in highest priced tier", "moving data to whatever location Atlassian feels fits the best (for whom?)", "we are compliant regarding privacy shield" and the misinterpretation regarding the CJEU rule regarding SCCs just tells us the story, that Atlassian is not caring very much about data protection laws. To say at least.

Everyone within the EU choosing the Atlassian Cloud is taking serious risks. If Atlassian is serious about the GDPR they must have an independend legal entity within the EU without any obligations regarding non-EU legal entities when it comes to data access. And they must get rid of the AWS hosting ...

Like • like this

Are you saying Amazon AWS is not GDPR compliant? Seems hard to believe. They follow CISPE to avoid these kind of issues.

Like • sym likes this

Hi Vincent,

please have a look at:
https://noyb.eu/en/faqs-cjeu-case
https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu
(noyb was the non-profit organization responsible for the lawsuit against Safe Harbour and Privacy Shield).

For many years everybody knew that the level of data protection is not as high as within the european union and that U.S. intelligence laws are very excessive when it comes to data access. In addition to that all U.S. entities having access to data residing in foreign countries must grant access to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement services (CLOUD Act). This cannot be prevented by private contracts like the SCCs. This was also the reason why Privacy Shield and it's predecessor Safe Harbour was voided by the CJEU.

The CJEU ruled that any agreement must guarantee a sufficient level of data protection in practice and that the U.S. does not have a sufficient level of data protection. You can only use SCCs when appropriate measures are taken like only storing encrypted data when the encryption key cannot be accessed by U.S. entities. It is quite clear that this will render most cloud services useless.

Beside of that the DPAs in Germany have released a statement following the CJEU ruling as well as the EDPB: https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/edpb/files/files/file1/20200724_edpb_faqoncjeuc31118_en.pdf

The ruling is following previous decisions from the past years. The issue is that it has been ignored by the EU Commision with the Privacy Shield (it was basically Safe Harbour with the very same issues).

As long as Amazon has access to european data centers from the U.S. I don't see how they can be compliant. They are ignoring this fact like many big-tech companies. So it will be quite interesting how DPAs will respond. It would be like Alibaba offering services from european data centers and chinese authorities can force Alibaba to surrender data stored in these data centers to them. Then data residency within the EU won't help much. One solutions for Amazon would be to use european legal entities which have no obligation to surrender data to the U.S. But they must make sure that the CLOUD Act does not apply to these entities.

It's basically a fundamental clash between EU privacy laws and U.S. surveillance laws. There is no easy solution. Especially as one recital of the GDPR is the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

More information: https://noyb.eu/en/cjeu

Like • like this

@[deleted]: I asked Atlassian about GDPR compliance. First I received an answer mentioning all sorts of certifications like Privacy Shield and that they are GDPR compliant. After me asking more detailled questions I received the following answer:

Atlassian Support: "I checked with our legal team and I was advised that we cannot comment on matters that require legal interpretation. Atlassian remains committed to protecting our customers' privacy and security. We continue to closely watch the developments following the most recent Schrems decision.

We appreciate your understanding on this matter."

Should anybody from the EU use the Atlassian Cloud when their legal team is unable to describe how they comply with GDPR when it comes to the CJEU court decision?

Like • like this

@Stephan Munz,

Thanks for the info.

HI,

Many of our installations of Atlassian products are inside internal private network. And in these cases, view access to Jira issues or Confluence pages is public (because only members of the company, inside private network can access to the tools).

How can we achieve the same with a Saas architecture ?

Regards

Like • like this

Hi Asten,

Our Cloud Premium plans do have the added feature of IP allowlisting. This feature can allow you to setup your Cloud site so that your end users must connect from a specific IP address or range of addresses.

Of course your end users would need to have the ability to connect to the internet in order to be able to access an Atlassian Cloud site. We have a comprehensive list of addresses and IP ranges which end users must be able to access over in Atlassian cloud IP ranges and domains. While this answer is not exactly the same as a true private network, between these two pages you can effectively restrict this access in much the same manner.

Andy

@Andy

"Our Cloud Premium plans do have the added feature of IP allowlisting. This feature can allow you to setup your Cloud site so that your end users must connect from a specific IP address or range of addresses. "

Cloud Premium?

So another example of "hey you know this thing you can easily do with On-Prem? Well if you pay EXTRA you can kind of do a half-assed version of it on Cloud!"

Ridiculous

Like • like this

YES, this is absolutely ridiculous and a "hidden reason" for another MASSIVE price increase. Every (serious) company will need this "basic security feature"!

Additionally, this is something which costs Atlassian NOTHING and for us it just doubles the price, which is not justified at all.

One of the reasons that assures me that this company will have NO FUTURE...

Nobody will ever trust them again...

Like • like this

Hi @Andy Heinzer ,

thank you for your answer.

A usual configuration we have is :

1 Jira software for 25 user (IT Department) : 1750 / year
1 jira service desk for 5 agent : 1200 / year
1 confluence for 50 contributors : 2650 / year

Total annual renewal => 5 600

Or for 3 years, with first year licence acquisition => about 22 400 (but licences are already bought in our case)

Hosting on premise (or elected datacenter) is estimated to less than 200 / month => 2400/year (including annual upgrades and security patching)

The same in cloud (Premium as you suggest) is :

Jira software 25 users
Jira SD 5 agents
Confluece 50 user

Total Annual => 10 500

for 3 years => 31 500

To summarize, for a 3 years plan, we have :

On prem, with first year licenses and hosting : 29 600
On prem, with already bought licenses and hosting : 24 000
On cloud : 31 500

With these numbers, for a new deployment, Cloud could be an alternative, with a less financial effort.

But for existing deployment, it represents an increase of 40% ! How can I "sell" such a cost to the stakeholder?

Regards

PS : Here, I've excluded all specificities we have, such as :

Plugins integration
Custom dev
Communications with externals systems (API, DB, Front Apps, ...)

which have a (huge?) cost to migrate towards Cloud.

Like • Dalectric likes this

Our Cloud Premium plans do have the added feature of IP allowlisting.

@Andy Heinzer This requires us to trust that your multi-tenancy data doesn't accidently overlap due to a code error.

(This is something that has happened to even the biggest cloud providers. We once had an issue with SharePoint online where content metadata was able to be seen by other tenants.)

Normally, I might be able to deal with that. Things happen, and the world might understand. Nothing is flawless, even an on-premise setup.

But since you eroded all of our trust so much with this announcement, it's hard to give you that trust in your cloud. If even one instance of that occurred, the question to me would be, "Well if you didn't trust them, why did you move us there?"

All of that is moot for me anyway because you don't support HIPAA in the cloud, and my contracts prevent me from letting someone else host the data.

Like • like this

The new licensing model brings us a tripling of the licensing costs. This is absolutely unacceptable in the middle of the Corona crisis.
Who would think of such a thing? Arguments such as more security and less administration effort are used to talk up a huge price increase.
I am really disappointed in Atlassian. Then I can switch to Sharepoint.

Like • like this

Yep I'm looking at those kind of increases and more. Their timing is dreadful.

Like • like this

I will say, I really like SharePoint for corporate documentation. Not necessarily IT docs. But when it comes to corporate training and documentation, SharePoint has it's place.

Recommended Learning For You

Level up your skills with Atlassian learning

Learning Path

Become an effective Jira admin

Manage global settings and shared configurations called schemes to achieve goals more quickly.

5.9h Advanced

Free

Streamline Jira administration with effective governance

Improve how you administer and maintain Jira and minimize clutter for users and administrators.

1.1h Advanced

Free

Learning Path

Become an effective Jira software project admin

Set up software projects and configure tools and agile boards to meet your team's needs.

8.9h Intermediate

Free

Was this helpful?

Thanks!

Jira Cloud Admins

Forums

Product Q&A

Community resources

Support

Top groups

Community resources

Support

Learn

Community resources

Support

Events

Community resources

Support

Answering your questions on changes to server and Data Center

101 comments

Comment

Was this helpful?

Thanks!

TAGS

Atlassian Community Events

Forums

Product Q&A

Community resources

Support

Top groups

Community resources

Support

Learn

Community resources

Support

Events

Community resources

Support

Answering your questions on changes to server and Data Center

101 comments

Comment

Was this helpful?

Thanks!

TAGS

Atlassian Community Events

Welcome to the new Atlassian Community