Atlassian Bitbucket vs. Plastic SCM

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bitbucket
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Bitbucket is a Git repository and code collaboration platform, featuring automated testing and code deployment. Bitbucket Cloud Premium provides AI-powered development, more granular access controls, and enforced code quality, and Bitbucket Data Center provides a self-hosted option.
$0
for up to 5 users
Plastic SCM
Score 8.2 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
Plastic SCM is a full stack version control system that aims to make software configuration easy. It focuses on enabling dev teams get work done by facilitating branching, diffing and merging. The vendor says that for those purposes it provides cross-platform apps and GUIs with: Branch explorer Diffing and merging tools (both syntactic and semantic) On-premises and cloud repo management Code review mergebots (last mile…
$6.95
per user
Pricing
Atlassian BitbucketPlastic SCM
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
for up to 5 users
Standard
$3.30
per month per user
Premium
$6.60
per month per user
Bitbucket Data Center
starting at $44,000
per year 1 - 500
Cloud Edition
$6.95
per user
Team Edition (on prem)
$9.95
per user
Enterprise Edition
$23.25
per user
Enterprise Edition (perpetual)
$595.00
per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BitbucketPlastic SCM
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details* Educational institutions receive a substantial discount on Plastic SCM licensing fees * Corporate/volume pricing is available * For more information, please contact sales at sales@codicesoftware.com
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Atlassian BitbucketPlastic SCM
Features
Atlassian BitbucketPlastic SCM
Version Control Software Features
Comparison of Version Control Software Features features of Product A and Product B
Atlassian Bitbucket
8.2
Ratings
0% above category average
Plastic SCM
-
Ratings
Branching and Merging9.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Version History9.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Version Control Collaboration Tools9.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Pull Requests9.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Code Review Tools4.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Project Access Control9.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated Testing Integration4.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue Tracking Integration8.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Branch Protection8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
User Ratings
Atlassian BitbucketPlastic SCM
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
8.4
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Atlassian BitbucketPlastic SCM
Likelihood to Recommend
As a team we need to push code into the repo on daily basis, Bitbucket has proven that is a reliable and secure server to save and get the code available in no time. The administration part is really easy and there's an extra tool for every developer profile either if you want to use the console or a GUI like Sourcetree.
Read full review
Plastic SCM is well suited for the distributed development environment, where branching and merging can easily be handled. Its a good tool for version controlling, especially for a big team which is contributing to a big project simultaneously. Situation where Plastic SCM is not at all well suited are : If the project is smaller one and need to be handled by couple of people. So in that case setting up Plastic SCM and educating people to work on it is not at all efficient
Read full review
Pros
  • Free private repositories for small teams - this is great to save costs relative to other options
  • They have some robust (although sometimes confusing) team and project management tools
  • They have built out many pipeline and integrations, but we did not use these
Read full review
  • Version Control
  • Organizing Workflow
  • Transparency
Read full review
Cons
  • While it integrates flawlessly with other Atlassian products, it's lacking in 3rd party integrates, especially compared to competitors like GitHub and GitLab
  • Using Jira for issues gives a lot of power, but it's also a lot of overhead and complexity that may or may not be necessary for your organization. It also puts issues in another tool, adding a little friction when it comes to addressing issues in your code
  • Searching for and discovering other projects and GitHub isn't quite as intuitive or easy to use as competitors
Read full review
  • Interface
  • Documentation
  • Learning curve
  • Unity integration
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
All products have room for improvement. The system improves over time with better and better integrations and I look forward to even more features without paying extra! The system has increased transparency across my organization and with this transparency comes increased throughput on projects. I don't think I can go back to any other system and we are definitely married to this product.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
The architecture of Bitbucket makes it more easily scalable than other source code management repositories. Also, administration and maintaining the instance is very easy. It integrates with JIRA and other CI/CD applications which makes it more useful to reduce the efforts. It supports multiple plugins and those bring a lot of extra functionality. It increases the overall efficiency and usefulness of Bitbucket.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
The customer support provided by Atlassian (Bitbucket's parent company that also makes Jira, Confluence, etc.) is very helpful. They seem to be very concerned about any issues reported with their products and even just questions about functionality. They are constantly improving the products with new features in nearly every release. Plus they have a plethora of online documentation to reference.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more familiar tool compared to GitLab. Bitbucket won out because of its close integration with Jira and being in the Atlassian family. It was also cheaper than GitHub. As we started with Jira, Bitbucket addition became a natural next step for us. We really liked Bitbucket and stayed with it but we do know we have great options in the form of GitHub and GitLab should we need to scale fast.
Read full review
Plastic has best integration with unity - zero issues, native, straightforward. GitHub feels more stable but for smaller and or indie teams plastic s version control feels much more under control - you click, you feel safe. moreover, there is no need for extra tools such as gitkraken, gitlab, Sourcetree, fork, etc. it is really easy to develop games this way.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The overall return on investment is very high compared to other source code management tools.
  • Having a subscription model only is making BitBucket's cost of ownership very high over the years. There should be an alternative option for the purchase of a license permanently (like proprietary software).
  • Paying separately for premium support is not a good idea. Premium support should be part of the package itself.
  • No local or on-call support available in Singapore and many other countries is also painful. There should be some local presence, at least in their leading market countries like Singapore.
Read full review
  • Easy to use
  • Cheap
  • Better than git for us
  • Artists love it
Read full review
ScreenShots

Plastic SCM Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of