We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and UrbanCode Deploy 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."One of the most valuable features is that Ansible is agentless. It does not have dependencies, other than Python, which is very generic in terms of dependencies for all systems and for any environment. Being agentless, Ansible is very convenient for everything."
"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."
"The API for exposing all our infrastructure services is the most valuable feature."
"I like Ansible's ease of use. If you have Linux skills, you can create a reusable template for the dependencies and other configurations. I can store the templates in a repository and share them with my customers or other developers. It's a popular solution, so there is a large user base that can share templates."
"I like the inventory management. It's a very nice, simple, concise way to keep all that data together. And the API allows us to use it even for things that are not Ansible."
"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 was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the snapshot functionality, which allows us to access previous versions of the artifacts."
"The most valuable functionality is the ability to define the deployment process, schedule the deployment and automatically execute the deployments to different environments."
"The stability is good. I haven't experienced any issues."
"Stable solution that's good for automating the CI/CD pipeline: from development to production."
"The solution handles complex deployments very efficiently."
"It is very easy to make a software release. It used to take us at least a couple of hours to make a release, now we went to production with a new one last night. This new release took me five minutes."
"Performance has been an issue on larger environments, but it has gotten a lot better over the past two years."
"Ansible has just been upgraded, and the only issue that we are seeing at the moment is that the user interface can be slow. We're currently investigating the refresh period with Red Hat when you click a job and run a job. It seems that the buffer no longer runs in real-time. We haven't discovered whether that's partially an issue with our environment, but Red Hat has come back and said that they're working on a couple of bugs in the background. We've upgraded to that version in the last six months, and that's the only issue that we've seen."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
"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."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"There needs to be improvement in the orchestration."
"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."
"I certainly would like to have a better way to pass information between deployment steps using UrbanCode Deploy because that's really difficult to do."
"The interface allows access in a number of ways but that can be confusing."
"I would like to have the agent up and running at all times, as opposed to only while it is in the DevOps pipeline."
"The scalability of this application needs improvement. Changes and variations in the application become bottlenecks as they need to be more seamless and comfortable."
"I would like to see more reporting for container architecture."
"The technical support of the solution could definitely be improved as PMRs take long to resolve."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews while UrbanCode Deploy is ranked 6th in Release Automation with 27 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while UrbanCode Deploy is rated 7.8. 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 UrbanCode Deploy writes "It offers OOTB plugins for middleware". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and OpenText Operations Orchestration, whereas UrbanCode Deploy is most compared with GitLab, Microsoft Azure DevOps, HCL Launch, Octopus Deploy and BMC Release Lifecycle Management. See our Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. UrbanCode Deploy 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.