Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Miro
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Miro empowers cross-functional teams to flow from early discovery through final delivery on a shared, AI-first canvas. With the canvas as the prompt, Miro’s AI capabilities keep teams in the flow of work, and scale shifts in ways of working.
$10
per month per user
Pricing
Azure DevOps Services
Miro
Editions & Modules
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
Basic + Test Plan
$52
per user per month
1. Free - To discover what Miro can do. Always free
$0
2. Starter - Unlimited and private boards with essential features
$8
per month (billed annually) per user
3. Business - Scales collaboration with advanced features and security
$16
per month (billed annually) per user
4. Enterprise - For work across the entire organization, with support, security and control, to scale
contact sales
annual billing per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure DevOps Services
Miro
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
Monthly billing also available at $10 per month for the Starter plan, or $20 for the Business plan.
ADO has better linking than Confluence and is adaptable for a specific need, whereas Confluence might be a bit more rigid, but it's also sort of along the same lines as to what can be done with both tools. ADO also had an ease of use to it and can do a bunch of stuff with it, …
Miro
Verified User
Employee
Chose Miro
Miro can help with PI Planning and Retrospectives, similar to ADO, but offers more collaboration and interactivity.
Miro was a big hit with all the teams involved, it was easy to stand up and start using, easy to license, and easy to manage. Other tools offered stronger connections to tools in their product suite without the freedom and ease of use that Miro did.
I didn't make the decision in my company to use Miro, but I've used Mural in school and prefer Miro. Funcitonally, they're very similar, but I feel like Miro is more polished. However, Miro is the first tool I've used and the one I've used the most, so I'm a little bit biased.
We use a lot of products, each have their advantage. Miro has the best templates and also provides the best training. Lucid has some better data centre hosting location options and also account management team is very good.
Whilst I initially found that there was some parity between Miro and Mural, the iterations and updates since have found me favouring Miro a lot more. Whilst the templates available with Mural were incredibly useful, I find that the quality of life changes and UI / UX tweaks …
Miro offers a more user-friendly Ux/Ui, and it is far easier to work on content collaboratively at the same time. Visio does have the upper hand in snapping objects and connections to some kind of grid which improves organization. Miro also does allow for exporting of frames …
I was part of recommending a whiteboarding solution to my organization, where we considered five vendors, including Miro. Miro’s superior UI, SSO integration, pricing structure, support and training, and simplistic admin management were The determinating factors that made Miro …
Miro is easier to use than either Figma or ClickUp for communicating in this way. We still use Figma to generate high-resolution comps, but Miro has a lower entry bar for usage. ClickUp is trying to do too many things. Miro allows beginner and advanced users to get up and …
I also tried Microsoft Whiteboard. Miro's quality far surpasses ANY other product in its category in terms of robust features, ease of including board collaborators, and the vast collection of available templates.
Regarding TeamRetro, Miro gives much wider possibility to create and edit retrospective boards. Jira is an excellent tool as well, if you have enough money to acquire all the necessary addons. I think Miro is overall a good and competitive tool for Jira as well, though more …
I used MURAL as it is a required tool for an online learning program. Using Miro is my organization's decision and I like it. Its integration and features are richer than MURAL.
Miro does what it does very well: infinite white board space for people to collaboratively and remotely throw ideas against the wall. Once you know what you are trying to do, though, the other tools are more useful for actioning against what was plotted in a Miro board.
DevOps is much more user friendly than Git itself. There is a more GUI-centric interface, tighter integration with the Azure / Entra architecture. For those of use in the Microsoft-sphere, it really is excellent for code-centric project management. I rate this as an 8 because it does not seem quite as well suited for fully functional / non-code project aspects in implementation. Nor does it have customer / end-user portal / front end for easy reporting and insight.
For me, Miro works best for messy internal processes. One of the instances include there are updates in math guidelines or reorganizing how topics should flow. I can put everything on the board, drag things around, color code it, and suddenly everything actually makes sense. It's also a common interacting space for the team to think out loud. Keeps everyone aligned without different documents floating around. It has a downside too. When the board gets big and full of screenshots or reference files, it slows down and I have to wait for things for so long.
Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.
I did mention it has good visibility in terms of linking, but sometimes items do get lost, so if there was a better way to manage that, that would be great.
The wiki is not the prettiest thing to look at, so it could have refinements there.
Sticky notes cannot be easily resized. It would often be useful for them to transform into workspaces, because they become actual text content rather than just notes.
Perhaps there is no option to sort the work boards according to specific criteria (such as alphabetical order or date).
The various functions available should perhaps be explained clearly with a tooltip or something similar while you are working with the various tools. I often don't realise that certain things can be done.
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
I have advocate for the renew of Miro quite few times, however, it is not under my control as the decision is made in another team with their own budget. I would buy for my own entrepreneur projects (1-2 members) as I do know the value and work there 100%. So, I would pay out of my own pocket to get the value. However, If I wouldn't know the value it provides, it would be hard to decide with the current freemium features
Azure DevOps is a powerful, complex cloud application. As such there are a number of things it does great and something where there is room for improvement. One of those areas would be in usability. In my opinion it relies too much on search. There is no easy way to view all projects or to group them in a logical way. You need to search for everything.
Solid usability, we transitioned from Mural, so some of it is a learning curve from what we were used to in the prior tool. As previously mentioned, the scrolling feature and moving around the board is not as intuitive as I would like. Outside of that, the functionality seems to mee the expectations we have for a collaboration tool
I only give a 9/10 because of the speed at which it loads. I have never experienced issues with Miro logging me out early, or some other technical issue causing the program to crash, or even it just loading in perpetuity without ever actually coming up (unlike other programs such as SFDC). It take a minute for all of my boards to come up after I click on it in my favorites, but besides that, it's all good.
Sometimes it gets quite slow and there is a correlation between this and the size of the board. Hence we are trying to segment the boards based on product stages or projects so that the size doesn't go big. When you go from discovery to delivery on a simple board, it will get large and difficult to load, even crash or go white screen
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
We have never reached out to or contacted support because Miro's platform has been incredibly intuitive and user-friendly. The comprehensive resources available, such as tutorials, documentation, and community forums, have provided all the guidance we needed. The seamless integration with our existing tools and the reliability of the platform have ensured that we rarely encounter issues that require external assistance. This self-sufficiency has allowed us to focus more on our projects and collaboration without interruptions. Overall, our experience with Miro has been smooth and efficient, eliminating the need for additional support
There was a series of webinars which Miro hosted with our organization that went over the basics, then progressively became more advanced with additional sections. The instructors were knowledgeable, and provided examples throughout the sessions, as well as answered peoples' questions. There was ample time and experience on the calls to cover a range of topics. The instructors were also very friendly and sociable, as well as honest. Of course Miro isn't a "God-tool" that does absolutely everything, but the instructors were aware and emphasized the strengths where Miro had them and sincerely accepted feedback.
Easy to learn, Miro has a series of videos on YouTube that effectively taught this program to my team members and me. The program is drag-and-drop and works excellently. People pick up on how to use it efficiently, and it's great for organizing ideas more freely. This product is more challenging for some older audiences who are not accustomed to using a touchpad, but for most, it was very easy to use.
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or more business-focused projects. We also use ServiceNow for IT service management and this tool provides better analysis and tracking of IT incidents, as Azure DevOps is more suited to development and project work for dev teams.
While not as feature rich to be honest as some of these focused tools, it still replaces a vast majority of them. It is enough to make it easily replace the listed tools if you wish to do so. This not only saves time pivoting between tools, but also money with licensing which is an easy sell to my management.
Maybe is possible now so... Could be useful to manage in some way source code for the projects? not to edit so when we make solutions with different components in MIro, maybe each component could redirect to the source code of this component
We have saved a ton of time not calculating metrics by hand.
We no longer spend time writing out cards during planning, it goes straight to the board.
We no longer track separate documents to track overall department goals. We were able to create customized icons at the department level that lets us track each team's progress against our dept goals.
We did a dynamic activity based on actionable insights from a research study that I conducted. It was great to see people interacting, and one of the proposals was successful, resulting in a 6 million (in local currency) contribution to the company!
