We performed a comparison between AWS CloudFormation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 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."It provides control over all mobile devices that are being connected to the corporate network."
"We have not experienced any bugs or glitches with this solution."
"The dashboards, the security, and the customization capabilities work very well for us."
"It is quite policy-enabled, so you can build pretty much any policy to manage remote endpoints."
"It is a very helpful solution."
"It is a stable solution."
"Easy to use."
"This product works very well for companies already using the full Microsoft suite."
"With CloudFormation, there is no need to use complicated coding."
"Versioning makes our work easy."
"CloudFormation gives us control of AWS and any Cloud infrastructure. It creates the whole stack for Cloud services technologies so it's easy to manage the whole system."
"The most beneficial aspect lies in its capability to handle input acquisition and assessment."
"Its ability to treat infrastructure's code is valuable. It makes things automatable and reproducible."
"It is easy to work from the console and deploy new database services."
"Scripting does what we need to reinstall something from scratch."
"What I like best about AWS CloudFormation is that it is a quick and simple way to deploy various applications, like WordPress."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"The most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"We can automate a few host configurations using the product."
"The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching."
"I like the fact that Ansible is agentless."
"It has an easy-to-use interface. It is REST API driven, and it integrates with Active Directory. It provides the ability to grant permissions to other users who would not necessarily have those permissions via the GUI so that they could run other people's jobs. For example, you could have the Oracle team grant permissions to the Linux team so that they can use each of those playbooks or each other's code. It is called shift-left."
"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."
"The most useful features are the playbooks. We can develop our playbooks and simplify them doing something like a cross platform."
"Due to the abundance of features, there's a lot to organize, which makes managing and setting up the solution challenging. The setup is immense, and it would be good to see improvement in this area."
"It would be good if, in addition to the minimal patching and compliance, we could also use Intune for application deployment. For instance, if a device is not patched, Intune should have the ability to push not only a Microsoft patch but also other patches, such as a browser patch."
"The reports that are generated aren't so great. They don't give a lot of meaning so far, but that could be down to user knowledge than the actual reporting side of things. I'm not a big user of it, but I was a bigger user of MaaS360, and we used to be able to run weekly and monthly reports. In the case of any deviations. we'd get a warning immediately. That's not so easy to do or to get in place for Intune. This could be just a user issue, but when I compare both, that's the only thing that's lacking for me."
"Deploying an app can be a complex process due to dependencies."
"The UI is not user-friendly and has room for improvement."
"There is room for improvement in integration and security as well."
"The backend of Microsoft Intune needs to be improved. We have seen a little bit of delay as compared to other MDM solutions. That needs to be improved. A little bit more granularity should also be added"
"Intune has limited integration with non-Microsoft solutions."
"As soon as they manage to parametrize the whole thing and to implement parameters at all levels, it will become automatically a lot more flexible."
"There could be better error handling. It would be a good way to improve the solution."
"They could improve the product's capability to handle circular dependencies more effectively."
"The solution needs to offer better support to other cloud vendors."
"What could be improved in AWS CloudFormation is its user interface, in terms of graphical design, I prefer WYSIWYG."
"Provisioning a large environment or a large number of services takes a bit more time than with Terraform."
"For improvement, it's crucial that AWS provides options in terms of computing services, DB related services, and machine learning solutions. If I'm not hands-on with a particular service, like machine learning applications, I struggle to write the CloudFormation code."
"The solution must enable more hands-on designing of the templates."
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"The governance features could be improved."
"There are some options not available in the community edition of the solution."
"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."
"On the Dashboard, when you view a template run, it shows all the output. There is a search filter, but it would be nice to able to select one server in that run and then see all that output from just that one server, instead of having to do the search on that one server and find the results."
"One problem that I'm facing right now is the mismatch between the new version of Python and Ansible. Sometimes it's Python 2, and sometimes it's Python 3. When things get a bit dicey, I wish that Ansible would solve this issue by itself. I don't want to have to specify if it is Python 3 or version 2."
"The product could do a better job at building infrastructure."
"Because Ansible is establishing SSH sessions to perform tasks, there is a limit on scalability."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS CloudFormation is ranked 8th in Configuration Management with 28 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. AWS CloudFormation is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS CloudFormation writes "Pretty easy setup with great automations for provisioning that save time and money". 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". AWS CloudFormation is most compared with AWS Systems Manager, Spring Cloud, Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Chef, 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 AWS CloudFormation vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 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.