We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Director and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."The second valuable aspect is its capability to drive external systems like deployment automation engines or to integrate with Agile Central."
"Its extensive range of available connectors eliminates the need for manual code writing when implementing solutions, thus reducing coding efforts."
"Its ability to automate release deployments, streamline release scope, and reduce the cost of and time for deployment."
"The most valuable features of Automic Continuous Delivery Director are the UI, release planning, and tracking, and you can do your soft and hard freeze through CDP."
"The most valuable feature for me is the fact that you can easily design a pipeline to promote applications from a development environment up to a production environment, and the team can become autonomous in designing those pipelines."
"CDD is primarily used for showing end users (managers, business teams, project managers, and release managers) what is happening with each release. The status and reporting features are very important. Automation reduces time to deploy. It also allows us to do more with releases and testing prior to production, better guaranteeing a smooth deployment."
"The automation is the most valuable feature."
"We can automate a few host configurations using the product."
"The API for exposing all our infrastructure services is the most valuable feature."
"The reason I like Ansible is, first, the coding of it is very straightforward, it's very human-readable. I'm also on a contract, and I can clearly iterate and bring people up to speed very quickly on writing a Playbook compared with writing up a Puppet manifest or a Salt script."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is quite stable. If you set it up correctly with the right configurations and there are no hiccups during installation and deployment, it will be stable. I'd give stability a rating of eight out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don’t need an agent for it to work."
"Ansible provides great reliability when coupled with a versioning system (git). It helps providing predictability to the network by knowing exactly what's being pushed after validating it in production."
"The product's development has been stopped. It focuses on maintaining existing products."
"We have rolled out the SAFe model, but what we would like to have is better integration with Agile Central, for instance, or at least at the plugin level, where we would select only certain stories instead of many stories in the sprint."
"CDD and RA should be two modules in the same product. They do not automatically “talk” to each other. and they require endpoint definition."
"We would like to have a more user-friendly interface. It is already very friendly, but as soon as you start to have many applications with many tasks, the applications should be easier to manipulate on the screen."
"Reporting and dashboarding could be improved. Release pipelines should be creatable via templates as well as easily integrable/chained together. Visual navigation could also be improved when the pipelines become too large."
"Automic Continuous Delivery Director can improve the integrations. We have 25 but would like more."
"Some of the modules in Ansible could be a bit more mature. There is still a little room for further development. Some performance aspects could be improved, perhaps in the form of parallelism within Ansible."
"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."
"We are not using the Dashboard a lot because we have higher expectations from it. The default Dashboard from Tower doesn't give that much information. We really want to get down into more than if the job succeeded or what was the percentage of success. We want to get down to task-level success. If, in a job, there are ten tasks, we want to see this task was a success, and this was not, and how many were not. That's the kind of granularity we are looking for, that Tower does not give right now."
"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."
"Because Ansible is establishing SSH sessions to perform tasks, there is a limit on scalability."
"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."
"Ansible could use more public relations and marketing."
"When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Director Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Automic Continuous Delivery Director is ranked 15th in Release Automation with 5 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Director is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Director writes "An automation solution to automate the entire release process but lacks development". 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". Automic Continuous Delivery Director is most compared with , whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Microsoft Intune.
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.
