4 ms·
> Anything beyond that is up to the implementors "Implementors". Anything that needs to be "implemented" is either a) not finished, b) too big and complex, or
by CRConrad 4y ago
> Anything beyond that is up to the implementors
"Implementors". Anything that needs to be "implemented" is either a) not finished, b) too big and complex, or c) both.
Dunno for sure how much less code Jira has compared to, say, MS Excel or Adobe Acrobat, but I could imagine it might be up to an order of magnitude. But you don't have to "implement" those; you just install them.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y agoBetter comparison product is MS Teams, not Excel.
- CRConrad 4y agoYes and no. Yes, it's more like JIRA. But no, that's missing the point: That's what makes it an equally stupid "Enterprise product". Excel, OTOH, is arguably more essential to more corporations, and yet you don't see big international consultancies snap up contracts for six-year-long "Excel Implementation" projects with Fortune 500 corporations. You do see that for SAP, Oracle Business Suite (or whatever it's called nowadays), etc. They're products that you don't just install and use; they need to be "implemented". JIRA is more like that. Or, IOW: I wasn't comparing, but contrasting. (Which, OK, is also a kind of comparison. But for this kind, it's Excel that is the better example than Teams.)