We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Server Automation 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."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."
"One of the biggest advantages of Microsoft Intune is that it brings the management of Windows, macOS, iOS, Android, and even Linux under a single pane of glass."
"The key benefit of Intune is its integration with the Microsoft ecosystem."
"The biggest thing for us is enforcing logins only from devices that are managed by Intune."
"If you need only to load a specific profile and you don't have deep security functionalities, et cetera, Intune is very nice and good."
"Intune is effective because of the configuration management and endpoint security it provides. The graphical interface makes it easier to configure and deploy devices."
"It is helpful for managing devices anytime and any place without requiring dependency on the local networks."
"Its direct integration with all the other products that we have from Microsoft is valuable. We're using the E5 license, and we have a whole wealth of different products available. It just makes it easier to have everything from one provider."
"Server Automation's best feature is automated patching. It also helps us automate compliance and report generation. We can even integrate TrueSight Server Automation with a vulnerability management solution to remedy vulnerabilities by applying patches, deploying scripts, or changing registry entries."
"Among the most valuable features is its flexibility and ability to work across multiple operating systems. Being able to execute some form of data collection and not have to worry about whether I'm working on a Linux box, or a Windows box, or the underlying OS, I can do these collections, get these results, and put them together in a uniform format which makes it easier to present back to management."
"The most important feature is the schedulings."
"With BMC, we even configured applications, like IE or things that were Java-related. When we scheduled the jobs, it worked fine. It saved us time and there was no need for resources to monitor them."
"The product's valuable feature is its ability to conduct patching for multiple servers simultaneously."
"The ability to script and create BL packages to perform various functions. This makes automating our environment relatively easy to do."
"Technical support is good."
"The best feature of the solution is patch automation."
"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 useful features are the playbooks. We can develop our playbooks and simplify them doing something like a cross platform."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server."
"The automation manager is very good."
"The most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"It is very easy to use, and there is less room for error."
"The solution is capable of integrating with many applications and devices in comparison to BigFix."
"I have a lot of Apple products in my environment. It would be nice to have an improved integration of Apple products with Microsoft Intune without Jam."
"Lacking ability to leverage more iOS device management internally."
"It would be great if Intune offered better data protection controls for BYOD Windows PCs."
"Some enrollment features could be improved."
"The reports aren't complete, and it's not easy to build custom reports. For example, Windows Autopilot isn't working well in cases where the computers don't have a good internet connection. Then the option is not good enough."
"It would really be helpful to have the option to manage server operating systems as well, like Windows Server, at least. That way, we could scrap the use of SCCM, which requires a lot of on-premises infrastructure."
"We faced issues with macOS support. The product should have better inventory and asset management."
"Additional application deployment options e.g. MSI deployment with more complex parameters or additional side-by-side files, and non-MSI deployment options."
"Provisioning needs to be more user-friendly. We were using BladeLogic for provisioning, but due to a lot of issues and complications, we had to stop using provisioning with this tool."
"A better CLI Database cleanup tool would help us with our regular maintenance of BladeLogic Server Automation."
"We've had to increase RAM and CPU processing in order to alleviate some of the sluggishness during patching."
"I would like to see a better methodology for handling REST calls and integration into the APIs. They add new APIs as they add functions, but they've missed some from older components which they still haven't added in. Some of the APIs are there but the CLI calls are not there."
"Without any knowledge of the product, we used the KB articles to start working. As a result, we definitely did not have full knowledge of BMC BladeLogic... They need to provide a minimum of knowledge with training on YouTube or somewhere else."
"I would like to see more container integration in the next release of this solution."
"Resource management on the base servers is sluggish and could be improved."
"Needs more use cases into compliance management and the remediation process."
"Documentation could be improved. Many times, if I'm looking for something, I have to Google it in a lot of places, then figure out what the best approach will be. There are some best practices documents, but they don't give you the information."
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
"Accessibility. Ansible uses a CLI by default. Those accustomed to it can find their way and adopt the YAML files easily over time. But, some users are more comfortable using UIs..."
"There are some options not available in the community edition of the solution."
"It would be good to make the solution more user-friendly,"
"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."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
More BMC TrueSight Server Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC TrueSight Server Automation is ranked 12th in Configuration Management with 18 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. BMC TrueSight Server Automation is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Server Automation writes "Easy to deploy, automatic patching, and scalable". 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". BMC TrueSight Server Automation is most compared with BigFix, Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, HashiCorp Terraform and Parallels Mac Management for Microsoft SCCM, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and BigFix. See our BMC TrueSight Server Automation 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.