>The problem I have with the incessant Jira bitching is that I rarely feel that bitchers have a true understanding for the extreme difficulty of the organizatio

>The problem I have with the incessant Jira bitching is that I rarely feel that bitchers have a true understanding for the extreme difficulty of the organization-wide problem Jira is trying to solve. This is a lot of hearsay which tends to devolve into a debate of "we absolute need this!" vs "no you don't, see X". >Obviously some of the complaints (speed, stability) are very valid I don't think people defending it fully grasp just how important speed and stability are, or at least live in a corporation where Jira was optimized better than the average corporation does. Given not everything is the fault of Jira, but when Jira is expected to be the place you go to all the time and it is that slow, it becomes very impactful to morale. >"Jira is the worst project management tool, except for all the others". This doesn't work until big corps actually try something different, but pretty much all of them push back on the mere idea of trying alternatives. If you can't invest a few months trying a different system, you can't judge it. And since those few months are seen as a "great risk", no manager is going to push the issue any further, even if Jira's costs per developer could easily run into the hundreds (or thousands, for 6-figures) a year on morale loss and time loss alone. And this is the crux of the matter. Management likes concrete numbers. Management likes mimicking what other successful companies do. Management does not like fairly abstract things with great risks. Management does not like big risks with abstract rewards.