We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Spring Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like that we can implement conditional access."
"It's normally able to meet 100% expectations of our customers."
"The ability to wipe data from and reset devices is one of the most important and valuable features. If a device is reported stolen, we can freeze it or wipe the data from it, preventing data leakage."
"The most important thing for me is the autopilot feature."
"There are so many features, but Windows Autopilot is one of the features that are very valuable for most customers."
"Mobile device management is most valuable."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"The most valuable features are the ones that make sure that the deployment is of a standard operating system and the Zero Touch deployment, which is very useful. This allows users to have an out of box experience."
"There are no agents by default, so adding a new server is a matter of a couple lines of configuration (on a new server and the configuration master)."
"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."
"Feature-wise, the solution is a good open-source software offering broad support. Also, it's reliable."
"The automation manager is very good."
"The solution can scale."
"It is all modular-based. If there is not a module for it today, someone will write it."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"It is quick to production. It has an API in the back which allows for integrations."
"The solution's initial setup is straightforward. The deployment process took me around ten minutes to fifteen minutes."
"Spring Cloud integrates well."
"It offers excellent scalability."
"There could be more wizard-driven policy development or creation. Some of the policies can get quite complex. If they have a wizard that assists the administrators in creating the policy, that will be a great job."
"One big problem with Microsoft is that they're changing the names of the products quite often, or they're quite consistently doing so. Intune is now Endpoint administration. Constantly switching the user interface or the administrative interface makes it quite hard to keep pace. If you are on a two-week holiday and you come back and look at the same screen you have looked at for the last couple of months, it looks different, which is annoying. Changing things around all the time doesn't make it easy."
"The configuration and pricing can be improved."
"Reporting in Microsoft solutions is pathetic. With Intune, I'm getting a free inventory tool, but I don't get a reporting tool. When I go to Intune, I can see one machine's entire data in terms of the hardware and the software running on it, but I cannot generate a report for all the machines in the organization. The reporting is the only feature holding back the functionality that is already there."
"I'm still playing around with it and haven't had any issues with the product yet, but support can definitely be improved."
"There is still a gap between SCCM and Intune, especially in the reporting, inventory, and software deployment areas."
"There are a lot of small use cases where we realized that some technical solution was missing in Microsoft in comparison to other products. For example, it lacks something similar to sensing or location-based rules and configurations."
"They could also make it easier to use because there are some other products that may be easier to use in terms of the look and feel of the dashboard."
"Improvements should be made in terms of execution speed, which is, I believe, the most lacking feature. Aside from that, re-triggering a failed task is another useful feature."
"Documentation could be improved. Many times, if I'm looking for something, I have to Google it in a lot of places, then figure out what the best approach will be. There are some best practices documents, but they don't give you the information."
"From Red Hat Insights point of view, the product is not on top as it is not responding as per the demand...Like on cloud platforms, you can see the main parts of Red Hat Insights, along with the inventory of all your apps. So, that is missing in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform."
"Because Ansible is establishing SSH sessions to perform tasks, there is a limit on scalability."
"The area which I feel can be improved is the custom modules. For example, there are something like 106 official modules available in the Ansible library. A year ago, that number was somewhere around 58. While Ansible is improving day by day, this can be improved more. For instance, when you need to configure in the cloud, you need to write up a module for that."
"The documentation for the installation step of deployment, OpenStack, etc., and these things have to be a bit more detailed."
"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."
"Ansible has just been upgraded, and the only issue that we are seeing at the moment is that the user interface can be slow. We're currently investigating the refresh period with Red Hat when you click a job and run a job. It seems that the buffer no longer runs in real-time. We haven't discovered whether that's partially an issue with our environment, but Red Hat has come back and said that they're working on a couple of bugs in the background. We've upgraded to that version in the last six months, and that's the only issue that we've seen."
"If there's a dashboard like the ones provided by Apigee or Kong, that will be useful."
"It would be beneficial for the framework to become more lightweight and efficient when transitioning to the cloud."
"Stability is one area in the solution that needs to improve."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews while Spring Cloud is ranked 19th in Configuration Management with 3 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while Spring Cloud is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spring Cloud writes "Though the initial setup phase is straightforward, its stability needs to improve". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and BMC TrueSight Server Automation, whereas Spring Cloud is most compared with AWS CloudFormation and HashiCorp Terraform. See our Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. Spring Cloud report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management 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.
