We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Network Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Easy to use."
"Stable solution at a good price."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune is having all our devices compliant with our policies."
"There has been a noticeable increase in productivity for both my organization and clients."
"Configuration profiles, remediation, scripts, and auto-pilot features are very good."
"Internet-based access with security is what I have found to be most valuable. It is also a stable and scalable solution."
"As the solution is a software as a service, the scalability is unlimited."
"Autopilot is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune."
"Depending on who's looking at the data, they need to configure that data in different ways, and the dashboards help us to do that better than what was previously available."
"The network security of BMC TrueSight Network Automation has been the best feature."
"The compliance management, patching, and OS upgrades are useful features."
"The log audit and historical configurations are the most valuable feature."
"It is helpful if you schedule daily or weekly archiving for your config groups. Then, you can go by what are in those configuration groups, before and after, if you make changes. So, configuration management is really helpful in network management."
"We use it to back up configurations so the configuration management is valuable for us."
"This product has helped us because we can now do many tasks at once. Rather than copy one file to one device, we can do an entire group at one time."
"The backup and restore configurations are really helpful for a number of network devices, as you can automate them, then know what changes have been done, who made the changes, etc. So, it's quite helpful in the network management area."
"Role-based access control and agentless architecture are the main features which may attract users."
"Ansible Galaxy is helpful for roles and Git Submodules: No dependency in managing playbooks. Also, fact caching in redis for host/role grp information speeds up execution. Finally, variable management is easy."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching."
"It enabled me to take the old build manifest and automated everything. So when it came time to spin everything up, it was quick and simple. I could spin it up and test it out. And then, when it came time to roll production, it was a done deal. When we expanded to multiple data centers, it was same thing: Change a few IP addresses, change some names, and off we went."
"It is agentless. I don't have to think about which client system my unit has understanding in or not, because I can execute from my system. It will go and configure it, and any module that it is looking for will be shipped out."
"It has improved our organization through provisioning and security hardening. When we do get a new VM, we have been able to bring on a provisioned machine in less than a day. This morning alone, I provisioned two machines within an hour. I am talking about hardening, installing antivirus software on it, and creating user accounts because the Playbooks were predesigned. From the time we got the servers to the actual hand-off, it takes less than an hour. We are talking about having the servers actually authenticate Red Hat Satellites and run the yum updates. All of that can be done within an hour."
"Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server."
"It would be great if Intune offered better data protection controls for BYOD Windows PCs."
"There are a couple of issues with stability."
"The solution can have some compliance problems in general and the end-point user can bypass easily the company policies in Intune."
"Microsoft Intune could improve by being more user-friendly and having it geared toward device management. The graphic interface is not very good."
"The reporting could be improved, as it's pretty poor compared to other products of this type."
"The pricing can be expensive if you are not combining it with other products."
"Regarding mobile devices, Intune is good, but there are other services that I would say are ahead of Intune from an administration and reporting point of view."
"We need the capabilities of the Cloud Management Gateway (CMG) to be enhanced through Intune instead of Azure."
"For customized compliance, it takes some effort to implement things. If the device configuration is quite complex, then you have to do quite number of customizations in the DNA tool for out-of-the-box compliance. These regular expressions have to be modified based on the requirements of the compliance."
"I would like to see more device supported features, mostly on the new brands and models coming in. For any new version or model, it should be supported by the tool, especially the newest versions. For example, the newest devices, like Aruba Wireless, and routers need support from the tool."
"There could be automated processes to retrieve the CVS and create a compliance tool."
"I believe there could be new features in terms of the latest technology."
"I'd like to be able to get more devices into compliance with standards, but that means running additional rule sets and that takes time."
"They need to have a single sign-on."
"We've been working with BMC support in various ways such as to allow for the high-availability components to the TSIMs to work together. There have been issues there. We've seen randomness in how other pieces of the software work. Integration with the Presentation Server and the TSIMs has been a challenge. The ports that are required for HA to be utilized were not clearly documented anywhere. In fact, they still aren't documented online anywhere, even though we managed to pull it out of some of their support people."
"BMC TrueSight Network Automation can improve by having a better UI. The overall quality of the UI could be better."
"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."
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
"What we need is model-driven, declarative software infrastructure management. However, things tend to break with new versions, requiring a lot of work to fix…The focus should be on improving the support for Ansible in the area of AI coding."
"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."
"There could be more stuff in the workflows. I hope that if I have ten templates with different services on it, workflow could auto-populate all the template-based services."
"It could be easier to integrate Ansible with other solutions. No single tool can do everything. For example, we use Terraform for infrastructure and other solutions for configuration management and VMs."
"For a couple of the API integrations, there has been a lack of documentation."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
More BMC TrueSight Network Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC TrueSight Network Automation is ranked 7th in Network Automation with 10 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 2nd in Network Automation with 58 reviews. BMC TrueSight Network Automation is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Network Automation writes "Helps with patching, OS upgrade, and security vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". BMC TrueSight Network Automation is most compared with Cisco DNA Center and SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, whereas 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. See our BMC TrueSight Network Automation vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Network Automation vendors and best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Network 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.
