We performed a comparison between AWS CloudFormation and Red Hat Satellite 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."The most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune is having all our devices compliant with our policies."
"A valuable feature is user enrollment, where users can enroll their devices in their organizations themselves."
"The ability to (somewhat) manage full Windows 10 computers including EXE-based or MSI-based application deployments using Azure Active Directory as Identity."
"Intune's most valuable features are the device, compliance, and configuration policies."
"It's really easy to access."
"One of the standout features of Intune is its seamless accessibility to work data, eliminating the need to be tied to an office or a desktop."
"The solution is stable."
"The ability to manage devices with different sets of policies is most valuable."
"AWS Cloud automation reduces the time needed to create AWS resources."
"AWS CloudFormation has automated the resource-building process, thereby removing the scope of human errors. We can tag the resources which help the billing process."
"There is a cost-benefit to using CloudFormation that comes about because of the automation that it provides."
"Its ability to treat infrastructure's code is valuable. It makes things automatable and reproducible."
"I appreciate the flexibility of infrastructure as code. With CloudFormation, we can define ground rules, control usage limits, and scale our infrastructure up or down programmatically. Having this level of control through code on infra is a major benefit. That's the beauty of CloudFormation."
"The CloudFormation template can be reused to create multiple stacks, reducing duplications and improving our infrastructure."
"Automations make it pretty easy to provision AWS, development, or deployment environments."
"It allows defining the infrastructure as code using templates, which describe the desired state of the infrastructure."
"Fixing is the most valuable. When you deal with a lot of hardware and software and you have a lot of packages, fixing is a bit difficult. You need to track and pull up all such things, but Satellite makes this task easy. We have branches in other locations, and I can manage other branches by using Satellite Capsule, which is a great feature."
"It cuts down significantly on the administrative time it takes to patch systems in a large environment."
"The 'remote execution' feature further helps manage systems on a consistent basis."
"Previously, we were using one server to update from a different repository over the HTTP. We had to manually manage the updates on the repository server. Satellite made the process easier."
"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."
"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."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"Intune's third-party patch management could be better. It should be easier for the average system admin to keep non-Microsoft applications updated."
"The scalability could be improved, and like most other MDM products, Intune is good but not 100% there yet."
"The UI also needs improvements because it is complex for end-users. We have had feedback from a few users in our organization who found the UI is not feasible for tracking and analyzing all the processes and monitoring all the devices."
"It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation."
"We haven't really gone through all the features of Intune. We are just discovering them. Every day, we see a new feature that we want to apply, but what will be great for Intune is to be able to deploy apps in a simple fashion. We should be able to easily install various apps on the Windows platform, iOS, and Android. Currently, we have to write some scripts. It's not as straightforward as we would like it to be. It should be simplified so that we can do it just with three clicks—next, next, finish—without needing to write a script."
"It doesn't economize when you scale up. We have over 14,000 employees, and we have between 7,500 and 8,000 city-owned or personal devices being used to conduct city business. Its price can be improved. It is not a cheap solution."
"The reporting needs to be a bit more interactive."
"There are a few security features that are not available in Microsoft Intune, when compared to other products."
"There could be better error handling. It would be a good way to improve the solution."
"GUI could be improved by adding graphical components."
"The solution needs to offer better support to other cloud vendors."
"Error-handling features can be improved."
"There is less support for on-premise environments."
"The solution must enable more hands-on designing of the templates."
"The product should be made cloud-agnostic, allowing users to deploy the same environment with minimal tweaks across different cloud platforms, similar to Terraform. Additionally, it would be beneficial to have the ability to manage templates outside of the AWS environment."
"Including certain examples of templates would be advantageous."
"Automation can always be improved and refined to continue to make it better."
"It has not been significantly updated in a while."
"Satellite should be bundled with Ansible Tower and the Ansible Automation platform. We face challenges from a security perspective because we have micro-segmentation in our network. For each server we provision, we have to set permissions to different ports so that the servers can communicate with Satellite. If I have a single server with Satellite and the Ansible Automation Platform, it would be easier to manage security issues instead of having two or three products on various servers."
"The documentation could be better."
"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."
"Regarding the product's ability to support third-party tools, Red Hat doesn't support all the layers from the open-source version of Linux."
"The solution's initial setup is a little bit tricky."
"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."
AWS CloudFormation is ranked 8th in Configuration Management with 28 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. AWS CloudFormation is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. 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 Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". AWS CloudFormation is most compared with AWS Systems Manager, Spring Cloud, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Microsoft Configuration Manager, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager, AWS Systems Manager and vCenter Configuration Manager. See our AWS CloudFormation 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.