We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Release Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The capability to provide visibility to the stakeholders, to management, is the biggest piece that showcases what the solution is about."
"Self-service for developers, because they are able to deploy to development departments on their own, without needing people from operations."
"The product provides efficiency, in terms time, cost, and resources."
"I would say our headwind, or our time to market, is reduced considerably. We get more consistent results out of it, because you write one time and once it's automated you expect it to behave the same way every time. And it cut down a lot of re-work for us."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment."
"I think on a day-to-day basis, it has increased the capacity to deploy. We don't have to wait for someone to do something."
"The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"The most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
"It has an easy-to-use interface. It is REST API driven, and it integrates with Active Directory. It provides the ability to grant permissions to other users who would not necessarily have those permissions via the GUI so that they could run other people's jobs. For example, you could have the Oracle team grant permissions to the Linux team so that they can use each of those playbooks or each other's code. It is called shift-left."
"The biggest thing I liked about Ansible is the check mode so that we can verify, after we've pushed, that the config there is actually what we intended."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"Some colleagues and other companies use it and comment that it is easy to use, easy to understand, and offers good features."
"Its checking and validating ensures our packages are properly patched."
"There needs to be better error handling and error descriptions. It should be more clear what the errors are and what we can do to fix them."
"If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details."
"One of the biggest features I've been asked by my team to put in there is opening more scripting languages to be part of the platform. There is a little bit of a learning curve in learning how to code some of the workflows in Automic at this time. If widely used languages like Perl and Python were integrated, on top of what's already there, the proprietary language, it would make it easier to on-board new resources."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system."
"At the moment, the version that we are using (version 12.0), the environment is complex with multiple installations. Therefore, the monitoring is not scalable, but this should be improved in 12.1 and 12.2."
"key thing is support for cloud-based deployment. That is lacking."
"It would be very beneficial for us to see integrations into cloud environments, especially into the Google Cloud environment because we are heading towards cloud."
"We would like support for the post-integration of this product before cloud frameworks because right now their approach is to avoid using on-premises activities and move everything to the cloud."
"Some of the Cisco modules could be expanded, which would be great, along with not having to do so much coding in the background to make it work."
"It would be helpful to have templates for common configurations. It would make it much easier and faster rather than creating a whole script. The templates would decrease the learning curve as well."
"The solution should add a nice self-service portal."
"The job workflow needs to be worked on. It's not really clear to how you actually link things together. What they probably could do is provide an example workflow on how to stitch things together. I think that would be very helpful."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"We are not using the Dashboard a lot because we have higher expectations from it. The default Dashboard from Tower doesn't give that much information. We really want to get down into more than if the job succeeded or what was the percentage of success. We want to get down to task-level success. If, in a job, there are ten tasks, we want to see this task was a success, and this was not, and how many were not. That's the kind of granularity we are looking for, that Tower does not give right now."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with Nolio Release Automation and UrbanCode Deploy, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Microsoft Intune. See our Automic Continuous Delivery Automation vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Release Automation vendors.
We monitor all Release Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.