An honest comparison of Linear and Height for project management — plus a third option that takes a fundamentally different approach.
| Feature | Linear | Height | Lova |
|---|---|---|---|
| Board view | |||
| Performance | Excellent | Good | Good |
| AI capabilities | Triage | AI-native | Conversation-first |
| Chat-first interface | — | — | |
| AI narration | — | — | |
| Agent API | — | — | |
| Cycles / Sprints | |||
| GitHub integration | |||
| Non-technical users | Difficult | Moderate | Natural |
| Setup time | Minutes | Minutes | Seconds |
Free for 250 issues, then $8/user/month
Free plan available, then $8.50/user/month
Free for 5 users, then €19/mo or €79/mo
Engineering teams that prioritize speed and keyboard-driven workflows
Teams that want AI-assisted project management with traditional board UX
Teams that want AI to structure and run their projects through conversation
Linear excels at speed and developer experience. Height leads on AI-native features. Both are board-first tools where you manage tasks manually. Lova is conversation-first — you talk, AI structures. A fundamentally different interaction model for teams that prefer talking over configuring.
Lova is conversation-first project management. No boards to configure — just describe your project and start working.