You're on your way to the next level! Join the Kudos program to earn points and save your progress.
Level 1: Seed
25 / 150 points
1 badge earned
Challenges come and go, but your rewards stay with you. Do more to earn more!
What goes around comes around! Share the love by gifting kudos to your peers.
Keep earning points to reach the top of the leaderboard. It resets every quarter so you always have a chance!
Join now to unlock these features and more
The Atlassian Community can help you and your team get more value out of Atlassian products and practices.
I can fully understand that to earn more money, you need to have more cloud subscription users so Atlassian can have continuously incoming on the SaaS version of Confluence. But this does not mean all users will use the SaaS version.
Take myself as an example. I have my own server in my home, and installed a Starter version of Confluence. I am the only user of this confluence server. I spend a few hours to install Confluence in my own server, set-up GRE tunnel between my home and my AWS instance, set-up nginx on the AWS instance, and set-up integration with my existing SSO authentication platform.
You may think moving to cloud is a good reason to reduce those steps on deploying it. However it is impossible for me to move my instance to cloud due to following reasons:
1. For me, Confluence is my notebook. I'm a freelance security researcher and submit security vulnerabilities to my customers. This means tons of sensitive information about my customers exists in my Confluence. It is definitely impossible, not even considering, to move those data to some random server not controlled by myself. One of the most important reason I choose the server version is for the fully control of the data.
2. For customers like me, it is basically impossible to check if the Confluence Cloud can really protect my data well. By saying "check", I mean having actual evidence. GPG encryption is some form of evidence. A network traffic record showing my Confluence Server is not sending data to other server is some form of evidence. However, EULA is not evidence. Blog articles, FAQ or sections in the document claiming Confluence Cloud have some sort of encryption is not evidence. Even one single penetration report or information security certification is not evidence. The cloud version is not security for me.
3. The local server means I can touch the data and application directly, and add plugin without using the plugin market. This also means its integration with my local Elasticsearch engine is easier. Cloud version is completely useless at this point, while the Data Center version is only designed for large companies.
Even for Atlassian, leaving the Confluence Cloud as the only choice for most customers is not a good choice. There is some strong competitors with Confluence Cloud, including Microsoft Office 365 (with OneNote and SharePoint) and Google's G Suite. However, you can not find another product provides so many features and allow full control of your data like Confluence Server.
For me, if the decision is made and fixed, the only possible solution is: using current version of Confluence Server for another 10 or 20 years. I really do not want this to happen, so I really think you should considering take the decision back.
Hi @silverb , where did you see this information? For me that is also highly impacting on our business...
You @Vitor LC are surprised, right?
That is exactly what I felt when I heard this message. I literally jump out of my bed and wrote this thread, though the only thing will happen is me saying good bye to all products from Atlassian.
A typical sign of not caring any customers, even if in cloud. This is what I felt.
For me as admin of a university institute already in the last time paying increasing atlassian bills a big topic. We stould at atlassian in the last time only, because it was more expensive to migrate than to stay. Now things are clear - we have to invest into a migration tool.
Cloud is not an option for us - we have integrated confluence into a lot of local application and we will never open the cloud to our local network.
So I can only say - good bye atlassian, it was a nice time, but now it ends.
Unfortunately, as I've learned over the last 18 months using on-prem Confluence Server, this is not the forum to ask Atlassian for anything--they either do not read this forum, or they do not care what is said/asked on this forum. There are hundreds of simple, obviously broken or wrong items mentioned on this forum, but Atlassian does not take any initiative to fix or correct them.
In that same sentiment, Atlassian does not care about retaining you as a customer. I have read dozens of posts where customers rant about how they are leaving or just left their Atlassian product behind in favor of a competitor's product. These posts are multiple years old, and the complaints they mention are still valid today, meaning that Atlassian is either not listening or not adapting.
I have used Confluence Server for the last 18 months because it has allowed more in-depth customization. I've tailored it to allow text highlighting, CSS float boxes, and usability enhancements for my two color-blind coworkers. I simply can not migrate to Confluence Cloud because these features do not exist there & the cloud version does not allow custom CSS.
And with everything I've observed over the last 18 months about how Atlassian operates, I would not want to migrate to Confluence Cloud. I'd rather print my entire list of articles to PDF and work off that!
Lastly, they're foolish for not simply increasing the cost for the 10-user license. We've paid a grand total of 20 bucks for a product that is worth a couple thousand. There probably aren't many Server licenses out there, but they could have captured some revenue and kept the product alive longer if they really cared. But, again, we already established that they don't care.
Goodbye, Atlassian. I wish it had been more fun!
I really like confluence, but this is an absolute no-go for me and my private wiki for my family. I am looking for alternatives like xwiki now.
We offer a full-fledged alternative to Confluence Server including the entire migration of your confluence. We also offer on-prem installations.
More about that under https://drupal-wiki.com/alternative-zu-atlassian-confluence/ and the migration information https://drupal-wiki.com/confluence-migration/
Yet those information target the german market but we are considering the international market. Drupal Wiki itself supports .en and .de
Even worse, their own earning report indicates there is an unannounced EoL for Data Center as well.
See this post...
Until the Atlassian can firmly tell us otherwise that DC isn't going anywhere, don't hold your breath for that to stick around either.
That report is taking statements out of context, and heavily reading into them.
The first statement to pay attention to is "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."
Also, "we expect that all our customers will migrate to cloud over the medium term" just says they expect to see a much larger set of customers migrate to the cloud at some point, not that they plan to discontinue DC.
I can understand pessimism, given the recent news, but these statements constitute circumstantial evidence, at best, of an attempt to eliminate DC.
It's not just that statement. It's the lack of response to our question to confirm the life expectancy of DC.
No one will confirm that DC will last past Server EoL...