We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."The features that I have found most valuable with AutoSys are that it is scalable, easy to use, fast, and always available. That's very important because if it's not steady then it's a real problem. So, at this point, we are satisfied with it."
"It gives a real-time view of all the batch processing that we have. Monitoring-wise, it is really good."
"We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows."
"Easy configuration and integration with SAP."
"It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets."
"I find that it provides better agility in regards to job execution features."
"It is stable, it works, and it does what it is supposed to."
"This solution has made my clients' workplaces a lot less labor-intensive."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"It is quick to production. It has an API in the back which allows for integrations."
"I like the fact that Ansible is agentless."
"Role-based access control and agentless architecture are the main features which may attract users."
"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 solution is capable of integrating with many applications and devices in comparison to BigFix."
"Since it is in YAML, if I have to explain it to somebody else, they can easily understand it."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"Because this product only computes processing days, it is hard when things need to be scheduled according to non-processing days."
"Some support issues need to be addressed, but not through email, through personal contact via phone or WebEx."
"A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"Pricing model for distributed should have an Enterprise option."
"I would like to see the Service Orchestrator, a B2B product, and maybe a process audit."
"Reduce the number of operational files. This would make the job of a system programmer supporting ESP easier."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Performance has been an issue on larger environments, but it has gotten a lot better over the past two years."
"Improvements should be made in terms of execution speed, which is, I believe, the most lacking feature. Aside from that, re-triggering a failed task is another useful feature."
"The product could do a better job at building infrastructure."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". 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". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Stonebranch, CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and SUSE Manager.
We monitor all Workload 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.