Wow. Traded all useablity for endless features.
Our setup barely works. And creating a story is such a massive pain. Sometimes things just won’t work.
So I refuse to use it for stories beyond one mega story.
Wow. Traded all useablity for endless features.
Our setup barely works. And creating a story is such a massive pain. Sometimes things just won’t work.
So I refuse to use it for stories beyond one mega story.
What makes this worse is when 1/3 of the teams in your org decide that they want a similar feature, but each comes up with their own custom-named tag ("owner", "lead", "point person", "point of contact", "jefe").
And then you want to run some jql queries against those tickets, and you have to use disgusting query generators to de-dupe the tag monstrosity.
They've done an excellent job of giving you just enough features to shoot yourself in the foot with.
You're a UX designer. a User Experience designer. User Experience is your profession. And you're telling me: JIRA, the application with massively nested hierarchical layouts and a 2 second response time for every user interaction is easy to use?
Jira has to be the most complicated monolithic issue tracker available. I should think even Jira's sales team would struggle to call it easy to use, particularly when compared to more simple competitors like Trello.
I certainly have not made UX my specialty so I'd like to know what markers I'm missing out on here. What kind of things is Jira putting forward that mitigates its crazy abstractions, its hierarchical layouts, combined with its slow response times? I thought those were the kinds of things that signified really bad UX.
Personally. I'm forced to use Jira as part of my job and have suffered terribly at its hands. If someone is finding it a breeze then it would be a great benefit to me to understand.
Maybe I should sell notepad as a fully extensible work prioritisation tracking platform that integrates with all email providers and now supports slack...