Documentation · Privacy and security · Support
A plan shows when work is supposed to happen. It does not show whether the team's current rate supports those dates. This app measures throughput to make that comparison possible.
The complaint is 140 years old. Wikipedia's summary of the criticism is that the Gantt chart's wide adoption may owe less to its usefulness than to the absence of an alternative. The form flattens assumptions, limiting a team's ability to respond to uncertainty and change.
A bar has a start and an end, usually entered early in the project. Unless someone updates those dates, it looks equally confident whether work is ahead, behind, or stopped.
Twenty-five years before Henry Gantt, Étienne-Jules Marey drew train schedules with stations on the vertical axis, spaced in proportion to real distance. The slope of a line is speed. Flat means stopped. Where two lines cross, two trains meet; the chart shows when and where.
| Marey, 1885 | Gantt bar | |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical axis | stations, proportional to distance | task list, arbitrary order |
| Slope of the line | speed | none |
| Horizontal run | time stopped | task duration |
| Lines crossing | when and where two trains meet | none |
Marey's chart encoded rate and interaction in 1885. A Gantt bar encodes start and end. It can show when work was supposed to finish, but cannot by itself answer "at the rate we are going, when will it finish?"
This app forecasts from demonstrated throughput: how much work reached done, and how fast, in the recent past. It draws the plan alongside the forecast so the gap is visible.
Uncertainty appears as a band. A single date would imply more precision than the evidence usually supports.
When evidence is thin, the app says so. Three weeks of history does not justify a confident line through the next six months.
A sample project, not your Jira. Opens in this page.
In October 2026 we classified 451 low-rated reviews of Jira Gantt apps (201 of them had written text) and recomputed the ratings ourselves.
| Complaint | Share |
|---|---|
| Bugs and breakage | 20% |
| Missing features | 19% |
| Support and response | 14% |
| UX | 9% |
| Performance | 8% |
| Large data sets | 1% |
The ratings below are arithmetic means of the reviews themselves:
| App | All | 2024+ | 2024+ Cloud |
|---|---|---|---|
| BigGantt | ★2.77 (273) | ★2.46 | ★2.26 |
| WBS Gantt-Chart | ★2.79 (160) | ★3.00 | ★3.00 |
| Structure Gantt (Tempo) | ★3.36 (61) | ★3.29 | ★3.07 |
| DevSamurai PM/Gantt | ★3.47 (175) | ★3.63 | ★3.62 |
The rating Marketplace displays differs from the arithmetic mean of the same reviews, and its aggregation method is not published. Either calculation preserves the relative order. The trend is not uniform: two of these four apps are rated lower in recent Cloud reviews than across all periods, and two are rated higher. What none of them reaches, in any period, is ★4.
More importantly, this data does not show that anyone is asking for forecasting. It records complaints about existing apps. The argument for measuring rate comes from the design reasoning above, not from these reviews.
The app is read-only. It adds no custom fields, changes no statuses, and writes nothing to your issues. Removing it leaves the project as it was.
Sources and the full domain note, including the review collector and the figures, are kept with the code.