ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management 2026 is a high-stakes comparison for teams choosing an ITSM platform that can support support operations, internal service delivery, and change control without creating unnecessary admin overhead. ServiceNow and Jira Service Management both cover core service desk needs, but they target very different levels of operational maturity, budget, and platform ambition. ServiceNow is best for large enterprises with complex workflows, governance, CMDB needs, and cross-department service operations, while Jira Service Management is best for software-centric teams, growing companies, and Atlassian shops that want faster deployment and lower pricing. This article breaks down features, pricing, implementation effort, automation, reporting, and ideal use cases so you can decide which platform is the better fit and what tradeoffs come with that choice.
Last Updated: April 2026
Overview: ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management
ServiceNow is an enterprise workflow platform built by ServiceNow, with IT Service Management serving as one of its core product lines rather than the entire product. That matters because when buyers compare ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management, they are really comparing a broad platform for IT, HR, security, operations, and custom workflows against a more focused service management product that sits inside a developer-friendly ecosystem. ServiceNow’s market position remains strongest in large enterprises, regulated industries, and global organizations that need formal process control, deep CMDB relationships, asset tracking, virtual agents, and extensive governance. Its strength is not low-friction setup; its strength is depth, standardization, and scale across thousands of agents and multiple business units. The practical takeaway is that ServiceNow is less of a help desk tool and more of an operating layer for enterprise service workflows.
Jira Service Management, built by Atlassian, started with strong roots in issue tracking and team collaboration, then expanded into ITSM with incident, request, change, problem, asset, and operations capabilities. It has become one of the most credible ServiceNow alternatives for software-led companies because it combines service management with Jira Software, Confluence, Statuspage, Opsgenie capabilities now folded into Atlassian operations tooling, and a marketplace with thousands of apps. Jira Service Management’s market position in 2026 is strongest among startups, SaaS companies, internal IT teams, and mid-market organizations that want modern ITIL-aligned workflows without enterprise platform complexity on day one. It is especially appealing when engineering and IT need to work in one environment rather than bridge separate systems. The practical takeaway is that Jira Service Management wins attention by being more accessible, faster to adopt, and closely aligned with product and DevOps teams.
People compare these two because both tools cover the same shortlist of buyer requirements: incident management, service requests, SLAs, knowledge base support, change workflows, automations, and asset visibility. The overlap is real, but the buying context differs sharply. ServiceNow competes when the question is how to standardize service delivery across the enterprise; Jira Service Management competes when the question is how to deliver strong ITSM fast, at lower pricing, with tighter engineering integration. That is why this 2026 comparison matters: these tools can solve similar frontline problems, but they impose very different costs, rollout paths, and long-term operating models. The takeaway is simple: compare them based on organizational complexity, not just feature checklists.
ITSM Depth for Enterprise Workflows
For enterprise ITSM depth, ServiceNow still sets the benchmark in 2026 because its workflow model is designed for layered approvals, service catalogs spanning multiple departments, configuration-driven process design, and strict governance. You can create highly granular request models, approval chains by department or risk level, dynamic assignment rules, and standardized fulfillment logic tied to CMDB records and business services. Enterprise buyers also value ServiceNow’s native support for shared service management across IT, HR, workplace, legal, and customer operations, which makes it easier to unify request handling on one platform. Jira Service Management supports mature ITSM practices too, but its architecture is more approachable than exhaustive; it excels when teams need practical workflows rather than deeply customized enterprise operating models. Atlassian has improved forms, queues, approvals, and request types significantly, but ServiceNow still offers broader process rigor for organizations with heavy compliance requirements or multiple federated service teams. The takeaway is that ServiceNow has more ITSM depth, while Jira Service Management has enough depth for many teams without the enterprise burden.
| Capability | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| Service catalog depth | Extensive, enterprise-grade catalog and fulfillment workflows | Strong catalog/request types, less expansive for cross-enterprise operations |
| Approval logic | Highly granular, role- and condition-based | Good approval flows, simpler overall |
| Multi-department workflows | Native strength across IT, HR, facilities, legal | Possible, but strongest in IT and engineering-adjacent use cases |
| Governance and controls | Excellent for regulated environments | Good, but less robust for large-scale governance models |
| Custom workflow complexity | Very high | Moderate to high, easier to manage |
From a buyer perspective, the key question is not whether Jira Service Management supports ITSM; it does. The question is how much organizational complexity you need to encode into the platform. If your environment includes multiple service domains, region-specific controls, strict segregation of duties, and layered request fulfillment, ServiceNow justifies its reputation. If your environment is an internal IT team plus engineering and a few business functions, Jira Service Management will usually deliver faster results with less process debt. The takeaway is that ServiceNow is best for formal enterprise service architecture, while Jira Service Management is best for pragmatic, software-centric ITSM.
Incident, Change, and Problem Management
Incident, change, and problem management are core to any serious ITSM comparison, and both tools now cover the fundamentals well. ServiceNow offers mature incident routing, major incident orchestration, on-call escalation support through integrations, post-incident workflows, problem root-cause analysis, and formal change controls with risk scoring and CAB-ready approval models. It is particularly strong when incident and change processes must connect to CI relationships in the CMDB, so teams can assess blast radius before approving changes. Jira Service Management also performs well here, especially for engineering-driven operations. It supports incident workflows, major incident handling, on-call and alerting through Atlassian operations tooling, change requests tied to deployment activity, and problem records linked to work items in Jira. Where it stands out is operational speed: incident responders, developers, and IT agents can work in the same ecosystem without context switching. The takeaway is that ServiceNow is more formal and governance-heavy, while Jira Service Management is more agile and better aligned with software delivery.
| ITSM Process Area | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| Incident management | Enterprise-grade, mature escalation and workflow control | Strong, fast, collaborative, ideal for software teams |
| Major incident support | Advanced orchestration and communications | Good support, especially with Atlassian incident tooling |
| Change management | Strong risk models, approvals, audit trails | Good change flows, especially with CI/CD context |
| Problem management | Deep linkage to incidents and root-cause workflows | Solid issue linking and collaborative troubleshooting |
| CMDB impact analysis | Native advantage | Available, but less mature overall |
For teams practicing strict ITIL change control, ServiceNow remains the stronger review candidate because it handles formal approvals, standardized templates, and auditable governance better. For DevOps-heavy organizations where changes are frequent and should map cleanly to software delivery events, Jira Service Management is often the better alternative because it reduces friction between operations and engineering. That difference shapes user experience more than the feature matrix does. The takeaway is that ServiceNow wins on process maturity, while Jira Service Management wins on execution speed and developer alignment.
Automation, AI, and Virtual Agent Capabilities
Automation is one of the biggest separators in the ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management 2026 discussion because both vendors push AI heavily, but they apply it differently. ServiceNow’s automation stack combines Flow Designer, process orchestration, virtual agent capabilities, predictive intelligence, agent assist, and now broader Now Assist features for summarization, knowledge generation, conversational help, and workflow acceleration. In enterprise environments, this matters because AI is not only answering tickets; it is also classifying work, generating resolution notes, routing requests, and supporting self-service across service portals. Jira Service Management counters with Atlassian Automation, which is one of the most usable rule engines in SaaS, plus Atlassian Intelligence features for summarization, drafting, search, and agent productivity. Its automation is easier to set up for common triggers such as ticket transitions, SLA breaches, approvals, and alerts. The takeaway is that ServiceNow has the more expansive enterprise AI and virtual agent story, while Jira Service Management has the more approachable automation experience.
| Automation/AI Area | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| No-code workflow automation | Flow Designer | Atlassian Automation |
| AI ticket summarization | Yes, via Now Assist | Yes, via Atlassian Intelligence |
| Virtual agent/chatbot | Strong native capability | Available via Atlassian ecosystem and service experiences |
| Classification and routing AI | Mature enterprise tooling | Improving, practical for common workflows |
| Ease of setup | Moderate to difficult | Easy to moderate |
The buyer question here is less about whether AI exists and more about whether your team can operationalize it. ServiceNow’s AI capabilities are broader, but they often require licensing clarity, governance decisions, and admin expertise to extract full value. Jira Service Management’s automation rules can usually be implemented quickly by internal admins without a separate platform team, which is why smaller organizations often realize value faster. If you need sophisticated self-service automation tied to enterprise workflows, ServiceNow is stronger. If you need practical automation that actually gets adopted next quarter, Jira Service Management is often the better bet. The takeaway is that ServiceNow leads on AI breadth, but Jira Service Management leads on time-to-value.
Integrations with DevOps and Atlassian Stack
This is the section where Jira Service Management gains obvious ground. Because it is part of the Atlassian ecosystem, it integrates naturally with Jira Software, Confluence, Bitbucket, Compass, Statuspage, and Atlassian’s operations tooling, which gives engineering teams one connected environment for incidents, changes, runbooks, documentation, and deployment context. Developers can move from service tickets to engineering issues without translation layers, and service teams can expose customer or employee requests through branded portals while still tracking the actual work in Jira projects. ServiceNow integrates with DevOps tools too, including GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, Jenkins, and observability platforms, but these integrations are often about bridging systems rather than living inside the same operational fabric. ServiceNow’s DevOps and IT operations integrations are strong for enterprise orchestration, yet Jira Service Management is clearly the better fit if your company already runs Atlassian heavily. The takeaway is that Atlassian-native teams get a significant advantage from Jira Service Management.
| Integration Area | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| Jira Software integration | Available, but external | Native |
| Confluence knowledge base | Indirect/integration-based | Native |
| Bitbucket/CI-CD | Supported via integrations | Native or tightly coupled |
| Marketplace ecosystem | Large enterprise partner ecosystem | Massive Atlassian Marketplace |
| Developer workflow alignment | Good with setup | Excellent by default |
There is a second layer to this comparison: who owns the integration burden. In ServiceNow, complex environments often rely on platform teams, SI partners, or integration specialists to maintain cross-system workflows. In Jira Service Management, many common integrations are admin-manageable and easier for internal teams to support. That difference affects total cost more than subscription pricing alone. If your roadmap depends on strong ITSM plus engineering collaboration, Jira Service Management is one of the best for this exact use case in 2026. The takeaway is that ServiceNow integrates broadly, but Jira Service Management integrates more naturally for software organizations.
Asset Management and CMDB Comparison
ServiceNow remains the stronger platform for asset management and CMDB maturity. Its CMDB is central to the platform’s value proposition, with deep relationship mapping between configuration items, business services, incidents, changes, and operational events. Combined with IT Asset Management modules, ServiceNow supports software asset management, hardware lifecycle tracking, contract visibility, normalization, and governance workflows at an enterprise scale. Jira Service Management has made notable progress with Assets, formerly Insight, especially on Premium and Enterprise plans. It gives teams object schemas, relationship modeling, inventory visibility, and the ability to connect assets to tickets, users, and services. For many mid-market teams, that is enough. For global enterprises with heavy discovery, service mapping, compliance, and complex asset lifecycles, ServiceNow is still on another level. The takeaway is that Jira Service Management’s asset management is good and improving, but ServiceNow remains the stronger choice when CMDB quality is mission-critical.
| Asset/CMDB Capability | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| Native CMDB maturity | Excellent | Good |
| Asset relationship modeling | Advanced | Strong for mid-market use |
| Service mapping | Strong enterprise capability | More limited |
| ITAM breadth | Extensive modules | More focused asset visibility and linking |
| Best fit | Large enterprises | Growing IT teams and Atlassian shops |
A practical buying lens is to ask whether your CMDB drives operations or merely supports ticket context. If your team mainly needs to know which laptop, SaaS app, server, or service is tied to a request, Jira Service Management Assets can be a cost-effective solution. If your organization depends on trusted configuration data to support change approvals, impact analysis, audits, and infrastructure governance, ServiceNow justifies its premium positioning. This is one of the clearest places where a cheaper alternative does not always produce equivalent long-term value. The takeaway is that ServiceNow wins decisively for enterprise CMDB strategy, while Jira Service Management is best for practical asset management without platform sprawl.
Implementation Time and Admin Complexity
Implementation time is one of the biggest real-world differences between these platforms. Jira Service Management can often be deployed in days or a few weeks for a small team, with request types, queues, SLAs, automations, and knowledge base integration configured by an internal admin. More complex environments may take 4 to 12 weeks, especially if you are migrating from legacy ticketing tools, designing asset schemas, or connecting multiple service teams. ServiceNow implementations are usually much longer and more structured. Mid-sized deployments commonly take 3 to 6 months, and enterprise rollouts can extend to 6 to 12 months or more when CMDB design, integrations, process redesign, and governance are involved. ServiceNow’s flexibility is part of the reason; it can model almost anything, but that also means many organizations need implementation partners and dedicated platform ownership. The takeaway is that Jira Service Management wins clearly on implementation speed and administrative simplicity.
| Deployment Factor | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| Small-team setup time | Weeks to months | Days to weeks |
| Enterprise rollout timeline | 6-12+ months common | 1-3 months common, longer for large setups |
| Need for implementation partner | Common | Optional in many cases |
| Admin skill requirement | High | Moderate |
| Ongoing platform maintenance | High | Moderate |
Admin complexity also affects sustainability. ServiceNow tends to require more formal change management around the platform itself, including update testing, scoped customizations, and cross-team governance. Jira Service Management admins can usually iterate faster, although badly designed project structures can create their own sprawl. If your organization has a dedicated platform team and wants one extensible system for years of process maturity, ServiceNow’s complexity is justified. If you want your service desk live quickly and manageable by a lean operations team, Jira Service Management is the better review outcome. The takeaway is that ServiceNow is powerful but heavy; Jira Service Management is lighter and more realistic for fast-moving teams.
Reporting, Dashboards, and SLA Tracking
Reporting is another area where both products are capable, but they feel different in daily use. ServiceNow offers strong operational reporting, service analytics, performance dashboards, trend analysis, SLA measurement, and historical reporting across complex data models. Enterprises benefit from the ability to correlate incidents, assets, changes, business services, and team performance in one reporting layer, especially when executive visibility and audit-readiness matter. Jira Service Management provides solid dashboards, queue views, SLA tracking, filters, and report building, and it becomes more powerful when combined with Atlassian Analytics or marketplace apps such as eazyBI. Native reporting is generally easier to understand, but not as deep for enterprise-wide service intelligence unless you expand into Atlassian’s broader data stack. The takeaway is that ServiceNow is stronger for advanced service analytics, while Jira Service Management is easier for frontline operational visibility.
| Reporting Area | ServiceNow | Jira Service Management |
|---|---|---|
| SLA tracking | Strong, highly configurable | Strong, easy to use |
| Executive dashboards | Advanced | Good, especially with add-ons |
| Cross-domain analytics | Excellent | Moderate to strong |
| Custom reporting depth | High | Moderate |
| Ease of use | Moderate | High |
SLA tracking deserves separate mention because many buyers overestimate feature parity here. Both tools can track response and resolution targets, pause conditions, and queue performance. ServiceNow becomes more compelling when SLA logic must vary by service, geography, customer tier, CI criticality, or enterprise policy. Jira Service Management handles standard SLA models very well and presents them cleanly to agents, which is often more valuable for smaller teams than having ultimate configurability. If your operation is judged by broad executive KPIs and compliance metrics, ServiceNow earns its place. If your team mainly needs practical SLA execution and visible team performance, Jira Service Management is usually enough. The takeaway is that ServiceNow wins on analytic sophistication, but Jira Service Management often wins on usability.
Best For Startups, Mid-Market, Enterprise
The easiest way to decide between ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management is to map the tools to company stage and operational maturity. Startups rarely need ServiceNow unless they are unusually regulated or backed by an enterprise-scale operating model from the start. Jira Service Management is the better fit for startups because it offers a free plan for up to 3 agents, low entry pricing, quick setup, and strong alignment with engineering teams already using Jira. Mid-market companies often choose Jira Service Management too, especially on the Standard or Premium plans, because it scales well without requiring a dedicated ServiceNow-style platform team. Enterprise is where the comparison gets more nuanced. Large software-led enterprises may still prefer Jira Service Management if Atlassian is already core infrastructure, but traditional enterprises with multiple departments, formal CMDB needs, and service governance almost always get more long-term value from ServiceNow. The takeaway is that Jira Service Management is best for startups and much of mid-market, while ServiceNow is best for complex enterprise environments.
| Business Size | Better Fit | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Startup | Jira Service Management | Lower pricing, free tier, fast setup, dev-friendly |
| Mid-market | Jira Service Management in most cases | Strong ITSM without enterprise overhead |
| Upper mid-market with compliance needs | Depends | ServiceNow if governance is heavy; Jira if agility matters more |
| Enterprise | ServiceNow in most cases | Better workflow depth, CMDB, governance, cross-functional scale |
| Atlassian-heavy enterprise | Jira Service Management | Strong ecosystem leverage can outweigh ServiceNow depth |
For founders and technical buyers, the key mistake is buying for hypothetical future complexity rather than current operational reality. ServiceNow can absolutely support growth, but it can also impose high cost and process weight too early. Jira Service Management can support serious scale, but there is a point where enterprise controls, CMDB maturity, and shared-service standardization justify moving up-market. If you need another lens on stack fit, consider exploring BarakahSoft comparisons on ITSM software, incident management tools, and help desk alternatives. The takeaway is that company size alone does not decide the winner; workflow complexity and governance requirements do.
Pricing and Plans Breakdown
Pricing is where the ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management comparison becomes very concrete. Jira Service Management has public pricing and remains one of the more transparent ITSM products for SaaS buyers. ServiceNow typically uses custom enterprise quotes, which means total cost depends on licensed products, number of fulfiller users, environment count, implementation scope, support tier, and negotiated terms. For 2026, Jira Service Management Cloud pricing is commonly structured per agent per month, billed monthly or annually, while ServiceNow ITSM is usually quote-based and often bundled into broader platform deals. The takeaway is that Jira Service Management is far easier to budget, while ServiceNow requires procurement-level evaluation.
| Tool | Tier | Monthly Price | Annual Price Per Month | Key Limits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jira Service Management | Free | $0 for up to 3 agents | $0 for up to 3 agents | Basic service desk, templates, incident/request/change/problem support with limited scale |
| Jira Service Management | Standard | $23.80 per agent/month | $19.04 per agent/month | Unlimited customers, SLAs, audit logs, 250 GB storage |
| Jira Service Management | Premium | $53.30 per agent/month | $42.66 per agent/month | Includes Assets, advanced incident features, virtual service agent capabilities, 24/7 premium support, 100 GB per agent pooled limits may vary by plan terms |
| Jira Service Management | Enterprise | Custom quote | Custom quote | Atlassian organization-wide controls, multiple sites, advanced security/governance |
| ServiceNow | ITSM Standard/Starter packages | Custom quote | Custom quote | Pricing not publicly listed; usually based on fulfiller seats and modules |
| ServiceNow | ITSM Pro | Custom quote | Custom quote | Adds advanced capabilities such as virtual agent, performance analytics, or AI options depending on packaging |
| ServiceNow | Enterprise bundles | Custom quote | Custom quote | Often includes ITOM, ITAM, CSM, HR, App Engine, and support agreements |
Hidden Costs and Add-Ons
Jira Service Management’s visible pricing is attractive, but serious buyers should account for adjacent costs. Premium-only features such as Assets and more advanced operations capabilities can push teams from $19.04 per agent/month billed annually on Standard to $42.66 per agent/month billed annually on Premium. Marketplace apps, Atlassian Analytics, additional product subscriptions like Confluence or Jira Software, and higher user volumes can materially increase total spend. ServiceNow’s hidden costs are larger and more structural: implementation partner fees often run into tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, premium support and success packages add cost, and modules like ITOM, ITAM, HRSD, AI, or advanced analytics may be priced separately. ServiceNow is not just seat-based in practice; it is platform-and-scope priced, which makes overbuying a common risk. The takeaway is that Jira Service Management offers better pricing transparency and lower entry cost, while ServiceNow can become expensive quickly once modules and services are included.
Jira Service Management offers better value for startups, SMBs, and most mid-market teams, while ServiceNow offers better value only when enterprise workflow depth, CMDB maturity, and cross-functional scale are essential enough to justify the premium.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is ServiceNow better than Jira Service Management for ITSM in 2026?
ServiceNow is better for large enterprises that need formal workflow governance, a mature CMDB, and service operations that extend beyond IT into HR, facilities, and business workflows. Jira Service Management is better for teams that want strong ITSM with faster rollout, lower pricing, and tighter engineering integration.
Which is cheaper: ServiceNow or Jira Service Management?
Jira Service Management is significantly cheaper on published pricing, starting at $0 for up to 3 agents, then $23.80 per agent/month monthly or $19.04 per agent/month annually for Standard, and $53.30 monthly or $42.66 annually for Premium. ServiceNow uses custom pricing, and total cost usually rises substantially once implementation, support, and extra modules are included.
Is Jira Service Management a real ServiceNow alternative for enterprises?
Yes, especially for software-led enterprises already invested in Atlassian. It is a credible alternative when engineering collaboration, lower admin burden, and faster delivery matter more than ServiceNow’s deeper CMDB, governance, and enterprise workflow breadth.
How hard is it to migrate from ServiceNow to Jira Service Management or the other way around?
Migration in either direction takes planning because ticket history, knowledge content, assets, workflows, users, and SLA logic rarely map cleanly one-to-one. Moving from Jira Service Management to ServiceNow usually happens when process maturity increases, while moving from ServiceNow to Jira Service Management usually reflects a push for lower cost and simpler operations.
Which tool is best for DevOps and incident response teams?
Jira Service Management is usually best for DevOps and incident response teams because it connects naturally with Jira Software, Confluence, deployment workflows, and Atlassian operations tooling. ServiceNow can support these teams well, but it tends to work better as an enterprise control plane than a developer-native daily workspace.
What are the best alternatives if neither ServiceNow nor Jira Service Management fits?
If neither fits, common alternatives include Freshservice, Zendesk for simpler support-led environments, BMC Helix for enterprise ITSM, and ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus for cost-sensitive internal IT teams. If pricing and setup speed are your main concerns, exploring other ITSM software comparisons on BarakahSoft is a smart next step.
Final Verdict
Choosing between ServiceNow vs Jira Service Management in 2026 comes down to whether you need an enterprise workflow platform or an efficient, modern ITSM product that works especially well for technical teams. ServiceNow is the stronger platform on raw depth: better CMDB, broader service workflow coverage, stronger governance, more enterprise-grade change and asset management, and a bigger ceiling for large organizations standardizing operations globally. Jira Service Management is the better fit for a much larger share of the market than many enterprise buyers assume. It offers faster implementation, clearer pricing, strong ITSM coverage, excellent Atlassian integration, and much lower operational overhead. The takeaway is that ServiceNow is the platform leader for complex enterprise service management, but Jira Service Management is the smarter buy for many teams that want capability without enterprise drag.
Choose ServiceNow if:
- You need a mature CMDB and service mapping to drive change approvals, incident impact analysis, and audit controls.
- Your organization spans multiple departments and wants one workflow platform for IT, HR, facilities, and business services.
- You operate in a regulated environment where governance, approvals, and process standardization outweigh speed of setup.
- You have budget for implementation partners, internal platform admins, and long-term platform ownership.
- You are replacing fragmented legacy systems and want a strategic enterprise service architecture.
Choose Jira Service Management if:
- You want strong ITSM with public pricing starting at $0 for 3 agents and $19.04 per agent/month annually for Standard.
- Your teams already use Jira, Confluence, or other Atlassian products and need tight engineering collaboration.
- You need to launch quickly, iterate workflows internally, and avoid a heavy implementation program.
- Your asset and CMDB needs are real but not enterprise-grade enough to justify ServiceNow complexity.
- You are a startup, SaaS company, or mid-market business looking for the best for speed, practicality, and value.
For most startups, software companies, and mid-market teams, Jira Service Management is the better recommendation in 2026; for large enterprises with serious governance and CMDB requirements, ServiceNow remains the stronger long-term choice.
The biggest difference between ServiceNow and Jira Service Management is not whether both can run a service desk, but whether your organization needs enterprise process architecture or a faster, leaner ITSM stack. ServiceNow is the better choice for deep control and cross-enterprise workflows, while Jira Service Management is the better choice for speed, pricing, and developer-aligned operations. If you are also evaluating help desk and ITSM alternatives, check out our Freshservice vs Jira Service Management guide on BarakahSoft.
