We performed a comparison between IBM Workload Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"Technical support from IBM is very good."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"The project we worked on involved the running of nearly 24,000 job instances in a single day, so I would say that the solution is stable."
"This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released."
"The support from Cisco is very good. I was with them as a company for 40 years"
"The technical support is great, the product is easy-to-use, and it is stable."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"Some colleagues and other companies use it and comment that it is easy to use, easy to understand, and offers good features."
"RBAC is great around Organizations and I can use that backend as our lab. Ingesting stuff into the JSON logs, into any sort of logging collector; it works with Splunk and there are other collectors as well. It supports Sumo and that helps, I can go create reports in Sumo Logic. Workflows are an interesting feature. I can collect a lot of templates and create a workflow out of them."
"It is quick to production. It has an API in the back which allows for integrations."
"It increases our company's efficiency, automating all the simple tasks which used to take hours of somebody's time."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"I like being able to control multiple systems and push out updates quickly with just a couple of clicks of a button and commands. I like the automation because it is a time saver."
"Ansible Tower provides a GUI, which is an enhancement, and a well-liked feature by operation teams."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"It should support other schedulers that aren't IBM products."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile app that could be used to follow the job schedule."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"We are very satisfied with what we have. From a management point of view, whatever makes it easier for my team to help customers write their own playbooks would be something very beneficial. Everything is going as a service. Creating playbooks can become much more consumer-oriented so that customers do not need to contact us to write their own playbooks."
"It would be good to make the solution more user-friendly,"
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"The user interface on the Ansible Tower product could be better, but it is functional."
"For a couple of the API integrations, there has been a lack of documentation."
"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."
"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."
"For Ansible Tower, there are three tiers with ten nodes. I would like them to expand those ten nodes to 20, because ten nodes is not enough to test on."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Workload Automation is ranked 13th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 62 reviews. IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood and BMC Compuware ThruPut Manager, 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.
We monitor all Workload 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.
