We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps 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 product provides efficiency, in terms time, cost, and resources."
"The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it."
"The IT process automation is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"Gives people insight into what's happening during the deployment."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"It is an umbrella system that allows us to integrate many different systems into our heterogeneous environment."
"The metrics gathered after deployment, for example, the rate of success versus the rate of failure."
"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."
"Stable and scalable solution for work planning and code collaboration. It's fast, and it offers a good user experience."
"The initial setup process is easy."
"We can forecast tasks and the number of hours a task will take and can compare it with how long a task actually takes."
"Azure enables us to create a staging environment through to a production environment in an easier way and then get the code and run that."
"You can have test cases in DevOps but not in JIRA. And, DevOps has advantages in terms of executing those test cases."
"In Microsoft Azure DevOps, you have a one shop to get everything."
"What I like the most about this product is that it's free and it's secure."
"It is good for the purpose it is designed for. It is good for maintaining a repository of application code, creating pipelines for deploying the code, building the code, and deploying the code. It can be easily used by developers. There are no issues."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"Not a perfect ten because the user interface is brand new and it needs improvement."
"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."
"Templates could be improved."
"Better integration with the Linux operating system would be an improvement for this solution."
"The main issue that I have is the connection speed. Sometimes, the response is too slow. I am based in Taiwan, and I am not sure if it is because of broadband or something else. Its initial configuration is also a little bit difficult."
"This product would be improved if the helpdesk were included."
"Not all companies use the same methodology which could limit the use of this solution."
"They should expand it from just a PC, software, or server development platform to other kinds of software or engineering systems so that it is not necessarily built around a normal PC with a server. I would like to see the ability to write my own scripts in my own compiled program or online. Right now, there are things that you can do in the user interface, but you can't do them programmatically and vice versa. I want to see them both. If I can do it in a script, I should be able to do it from the user interface, and if I can do it in the user interface, I should be able to do it in a script."
"The solution could work to improve their reporting."
"I want DevOps to have more automated reminders about tasks that don't need management. We don't have reminders, so a project manager must track the tasks. It's not automatic."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Release Automation with 127 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2. 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 Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Allows us to deploy code to production without releasing certain features immediately and agile project management capabilities offer resource-leveling". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with Nolio Release Automation and UrbanCode Deploy, whereas Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management. See our Automic Continuous Delivery Automation vs. Microsoft Azure DevOps 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.
