We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Satellite based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Ansible has a slight edge over Satellite in this comparison since it is a free solution and easier to deploy than Satellite.
"Mobile device management is most valuable."
"Its protection policies are most valuable. It protects mobile devices as well as individual apps. It is pretty scalable, and its documentation is also pretty good. It is also pretty straightforward to deploy."
"With on-premises Active Directory, the main challenge was that we had no control when a user was working from home. We didn't know what exactly a user was doing and whether the AV was up to date or not. Intune provides better control of their machines."
"Based on my experience, I find Intune very flexible for managing Windows devices. We can use scripting, and we can make use of the self-service portal or the company portal to publish some of the applications for Windows."
"We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product."
"The Asset Management and Auto Pilot are valuable features."
"We have found the solution is capable of scaling."
"The solution is stable."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"Ansible Tower provides a GUI, which is an enhancement, and a well-liked feature by operation teams."
"This solution allows us to stitch a lot of different parts of the workflow together."
"It has made our infrastructure more testable. We are able to build our infrastructure in CI, then are more confident in what we are deploying will work, not breaking everything."
"It is very easy to use, and there is less room for error."
"It is all modular-based. If there is not a module for it today, someone will write it."
"The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching."
"The product allows us to handle patching for multiple servers at a time manually."
"The most valuable feature is the management of the distributed tool we use in the Red Hat Linux Servers."
"The compliance auditing helped me a lot."
"I like the integration with other tools."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is vulnerability management."
"The product is convenient to use."
"It plays a significant role in managing the lifecycle of our systems and ensures that we can effectively control and update the software versions to align with our organization's needs."
"The feature that allows us to import the business application from the configuration manager to Intune is not very good at this time."
"One area for improvement is app deployment. Another is the Windows update rollout. If you're rolling out an object to a device that's offline, Intune stops trying to reach this device after it sits idle for a bit. We are forced to find a workaround that could help manage that."
"Could benefit from user having more control over devices."
"Microsoft Intune lags market leaders, such as Apperian, in its MAM capabilities."
"More integration with monitoring tools is needed."
"There's quite a lot of development that they can do within their Intune dashboard. I think there are too many lines hyperlinked to move you around. Others, in contrast, give you a simple dashboard and an intuitive administrative walkthrough."
"The reports aren't complete, and it's not easy to build custom reports. For example, Windows Autopilot isn't working well in cases where the computers don't have a good internet connection. Then the option is not good enough."
"The product needs to upgrade itself when the server is overloaded."
"It needs better documentation."
"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."
"For a couple of the API integrations, there has been a lack of documentation."
"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."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"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."
"Accessibility. Ansible uses a CLI by default. Those accustomed to it can find their way and adopt the YAML files easily over time. But, some users are more comfortable using UIs..."
"The product could do a better job at building infrastructure."
"There could be a feature to simplify the process without the requirement of any patch manager subscription."
"It wasn't easy in the beginning, and some effort was required to work it out. I already had the product documentation, but it was not well organized. It wasn't easy to follow. There were a lot of documents here and there."
"The product could have more diversity in what it is able to deploy and might do better if it was not dedicated to Red Hat products only."
"Improving integration could lead to a more unified management experience for multiple operating systems within our data center."
"Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update."
"They could make it more easy to use and improve the GUI so that it's more intuitive."
"It should basically include a complete slew of system management and monitoring tools such as Nagios. It should be a single pane of glass that gives us a complete solution. It is a good solution, but it is missing a few important things. We're using Capsule for DMVs on other secured zones. Capsule is a part of Satellite to be a proxy of sorts."
"It is difficult to update and maintain."
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 Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps, BMC TrueSight Server Automation and BigFix, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with SUSE Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Chef. See our Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. Red Hat Satellite 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.