Miro
MiroExternal reviews
10,008 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Easy Collaboration That Just Works
What do you like best about the product?
Easy collaboration and multi-player use at same time
What do you dislike about the product?
One big, endless canvas that is sometimes hard to navigate
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Facilitates easy collaboration among teams who are spread across global locations
Miro: Effortless Collaboration Powerhouse
What do you like best about the product?
I use Miro to collaborate with colleagues on various activities like projects, management strategies, staff meetings, and more. I like the ease of use and how feature-rich it is in all the right ways. Miro's embedded personality, with elements like emojis and stickers, makes the mundane fun and different, and it lets you structure content in so many ways. The initial setup of Miro was super easy.
What do you dislike about the product?
I need more integrations with key Microsoft products like Outlook.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Miro helps me share information, collect ideas and feedback, make decisions, align on working areas, and view status updates.
Interactive Widgets and Effortless Project Sharing
What do you like best about the product?
The interactive features really stood out to me. I especially enjoyed the widget creation feature, along with how easy it was to view projects and share them with my team members.
What do you dislike about the product?
I feel the software is a bit lacking when it comes to helping users learn how to use it. It would be really helpful to have online courses or clearer, more direct instructions explaining what each tool does.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
It helps me collaborate with my peers and share ideas.
Real-Time Collaboration, Easy Setup
What do you like best about the product?
I like using Miro to make mind maps with my university classmates during meetings. The real-time collaboration is fantastic, especially because I can see my classmates' cursors moving across the screen. I also find that the initial setup was too easy and interactive.
What do you dislike about the product?
The speed, I would like it to be a bit faster
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Miro to make mind maps during meetings with my university classmates. It helps me with organization in groups.
Essential Tool for Agile Collaboration and Innovation
What do you like best about the product?
I use Miro as a core collaboration platform for high-paced innovation programs with cross-functional teams. It enables us to collaborate in a much more agile and efficient way, significantly accelerating alignment, decision-making, and execution in complex innovation projects. The new features have increased its value further, helping us prototype, prioritize, and move initiatives forward faster. I appreciate how Miro integrates AI capabilities and other tools like CloudCode, making it easy to connect our entire toolkit. The platform fosters trust and a sense of belonging, making collaboration genuinely fun, which is essential for great innovation teams. Voting on ideas helps integrate everyone's perspective effectively. The initial setup was very easy, which is always a plus. I’m giving Miro five stars—it’s an incredibly powerful platform.
What do you dislike about the product?
The feedback review tool
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Miro as an essential collaboration tool for innovation programs, accelerating alignment, decision-making, and execution. It helps my teams prototype, prioritize, and move initiatives forward rapidly, integrating everyone's perspective for more agile and efficient collaboration.
User-Friendly, Creative Platform for Team Collaboration
What do you like best about the product?
I like that Miro is user-friendly and really encourages creativity. The customization options are a big plus for me. I also appreciate the specific features like Dot and the Engage AI tool. Plus, setting it up was easy.
What do you dislike about the product?
I don't like the org chart's drag and drop feature and find the export data options lacking. Also, the integration with CMP could be improved.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Miro for team workflow, brainstorming, and root cause analysis. It's user-friendly and enhances creativity with customization options.
Intuitive, User-Friendly, and Essential for Visual Projects
What do you like best about the product?
I use Miro for planning my projects and prototyping. I appreciate how it solves the problem of organization and allows me to put things down quickly and see them visually. I like the workflow optimization and how easy it is to use because it's user-friendly. Being a visual learner, I enjoy the way things are laid out and visually presented. The initial setup was pretty straightforward and intuitive due to its user-friendly nature.
What do you dislike about the product?
n/a
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Miro helps with organization and allows me to put things down quickly and see them visually.
Engaging, Well-Integrated AI That Makes Brainstorming and Collaboration Click
What do you like best about the product?
Here’s the rewrite:
I only just got to explore Miro Canvas 26 today, so this is very much a first-impressions take, but honestly it’s been a fun few hours.
The thing that struck me right away: the AI features don’t feel bolted on. That’s rarer than it should be. A lot of tools right now are dropping AI into existing workflows and calling it a day, but here it actually feels like the AI was considered from the start. How people brainstorm, how they make sense of messy ideas, how collaboration actually works when you’re in a room (or a board) together.
I come at this from a UX research and product background, so I’m probably more attuned than most to when something feels designed versus just shipped. And these flows feel designed.
The boards themselves are just… engaging? Even in a review or feedback setting, which can get heavy fast, the structure and interactions make the whole thing feel lighter. That matters more than people give it credit for. Keeping teams genuinely present and involved over long sessions is hard, and good interaction design quietly does a lot of that work.
What I didn’t expect: I kept thinking about personal uses. Career mapping, long-term planning, just getting thoughts out of my head and into something that makes sense. There’s an approachability to it that makes you want to keep going.
Tomas’s keynote was a big part of what got me thinking differently about this. Something about the way he framed where Miro is heading just clicked, and now I want to actually test it. Going forward I’m planning to prototype as much as possible directly in Miro and start building out more autonomous workflows using these tools. Less bouncing between apps, more thinking and building in one place.
Very early days, but I’m genuinely curious to see where this goes with regular use.
I only just got to explore Miro Canvas 26 today, so this is very much a first-impressions take, but honestly it’s been a fun few hours.
The thing that struck me right away: the AI features don’t feel bolted on. That’s rarer than it should be. A lot of tools right now are dropping AI into existing workflows and calling it a day, but here it actually feels like the AI was considered from the start. How people brainstorm, how they make sense of messy ideas, how collaboration actually works when you’re in a room (or a board) together.
I come at this from a UX research and product background, so I’m probably more attuned than most to when something feels designed versus just shipped. And these flows feel designed.
The boards themselves are just… engaging? Even in a review or feedback setting, which can get heavy fast, the structure and interactions make the whole thing feel lighter. That matters more than people give it credit for. Keeping teams genuinely present and involved over long sessions is hard, and good interaction design quietly does a lot of that work.
What I didn’t expect: I kept thinking about personal uses. Career mapping, long-term planning, just getting thoughts out of my head and into something that makes sense. There’s an approachability to it that makes you want to keep going.
Tomas’s keynote was a big part of what got me thinking differently about this. Something about the way he framed where Miro is heading just clicked, and now I want to actually test it. Going forward I’m planning to prototype as much as possible directly in Miro and start building out more autonomous workflows using these tools. Less bouncing between apps, more thinking and building in one place.
Very early days, but I’m genuinely curious to see where this goes with regular use.
What do you dislike about the product?
Here’s a natural, balanced version that fits the tone of the rest:
Where it gets harder for me to make the switch fully is UI work. For building out full UI workflows and going directly from design to build, Figma is still where I live. There’s something about being able to stay in one place from wireframe to handoff that I haven’t found a reason to move away from. The fewer platforms in that particular process, the better.
So for UX specifically, Figma is still the stronger tool in my opinion. The depth of the UI workflow, the way it handles components and prototyping, the direct path to actually building, it’s hard to compete with that. Miro doesn’t need to be that though, and I don’t think it’s trying to be.
The way I’m starting to think about it is less either/or and more about what each tool is actually good for. Miro for thinking, synthesizing, collaborating and now increasingly for prototyping ideas and building autonomous workflows. Figma for UI design and anything that needs to go somewhere buildable. They serve different moments in the process, and forcing one to do the other’s job usually just creates friction.
Where it gets harder for me to make the switch fully is UI work. For building out full UI workflows and going directly from design to build, Figma is still where I live. There’s something about being able to stay in one place from wireframe to handoff that I haven’t found a reason to move away from. The fewer platforms in that particular process, the better.
So for UX specifically, Figma is still the stronger tool in my opinion. The depth of the UI workflow, the way it handles components and prototyping, the direct path to actually building, it’s hard to compete with that. Miro doesn’t need to be that though, and I don’t think it’s trying to be.
The way I’m starting to think about it is less either/or and more about what each tool is actually good for. Miro for thinking, synthesizing, collaborating and now increasingly for prototyping ideas and building autonomous workflows. Figma for UI design and anything that needs to go somewhere buildable. They serve different moments in the process, and forcing one to do the other’s job usually just creates friction.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Here’s how that could read:
The business problem it’s actually solving for me is consolidation. Right now a lot of my work lives across different platforms, notes here, feedback there, references somewhere else, and pulling that together into something coherent takes real time and effort. What I can see Miro doing is becoming the place where all of that lands and connects, so instead of hunting across tools to piece together context, it’s already in one place and ready to work with.
The other side of that is prototyping. Being able to build a prototype quickly, share it, collect feedback, iterate on it and run it through multiple review cycles without leaving the same environment is genuinely valuable. That back and forth between idea and feedback is where a lot of time gets lost in the current way of working, and tightening that loop has a real impact on how fast things move.
So for me it’s less about any single feature and more about what happens when you reduce the switching cost between thinking, building and reviewing. That’s the workflow problem I’m hoping Miro starts to solve, and honestly after today I think it might actually be able to.
The business problem it’s actually solving for me is consolidation. Right now a lot of my work lives across different platforms, notes here, feedback there, references somewhere else, and pulling that together into something coherent takes real time and effort. What I can see Miro doing is becoming the place where all of that lands and connects, so instead of hunting across tools to piece together context, it’s already in one place and ready to work with.
The other side of that is prototyping. Being able to build a prototype quickly, share it, collect feedback, iterate on it and run it through multiple review cycles without leaving the same environment is genuinely valuable. That back and forth between idea and feedback is where a lot of time gets lost in the current way of working, and tightening that loop has a real impact on how fast things move.
So for me it’s less about any single feature and more about what happens when you reduce the switching cost between thinking, building and reviewing. That’s the workflow problem I’m hoping Miro starts to solve, and honestly after today I think it might actually be able to.
General feedback from a UX Engineer
What do you like best about the product?
I think that miro does a really good job of providing all the different ways to learn and understand content.
What do you dislike about the product?
I will say it’s a bit overwhelming at times with all the different capabilities. I think some good siloing in terms of UX UI to separate the tools into digestible chunks.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
To be honest I haven’t used it since I was in a team. As a solo designer right now I haven’t found much use for it. Yes it works as a white boarding tool but aside from that it is a collab tool, which is fine I believe that is its strong suit
Flexible Mind Mapping with Limitations
What do you like best about the product?
I use Miro for mind mapping research, presentation ideas, and collaborating with teams on business decisions. I appreciate how it helps me visualize where I want to lead the research and what topics I could explore further. The colors and flexibility, along with the AI tools, significantly aid in generating ideas. Sometimes, I have a research topic in mind and use the AI to expand my ideas into related threads. The initial setup was pretty easy, and the free tutorials are helpful in mastering the product.
What do you dislike about the product?
You only allow 3 free boards on the trial version and when taking the free training to learn how to use the product I run out of space. Maybe not tie the training boards to your limit of free boards.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use Miro to map research and presentation ideas, and to collaborate on decisions. It helps me visualize my research direction and explore future topics.
showing 31 - 40