Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Ansible vs. BMC TrueSight Server Automation and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
397,717 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
It is very easy to use, and there is less room for error.
Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server.
Its checking and validating ensures our packages are properly patched.
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.
I like being able to control multiple systems and push out updates quickly with just a couple of clicks of a button and commands. I like the automation because it is a time saver.
It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up.
It increases our company's efficiency, automating all the simple tasks which used to take hours of somebody's time.
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.
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.
It gives us more speed to deliver services and applications, and we rely on security.
The most important feature is the schedulings.
The most valuable feature is its ability to remediate quickly and efficiently across a number of IT assets at the same time. It takes away manual efforts from the team to go out and fix those vulnerabilities through patching, conflict updates, etc.
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.
Compliance is also huge... By tying it to Atrium Orchestrator, our workflow tool, we'll be able to have a closed loop where we identify a compliance issue, cut CRs, get them approved, and then be able to execute these CRs and more seamlessly fix these issues on the fly.
Technical support is good.
For Ansible Tower, there are three tiers with ten nodes. I would like them to expand those ten nodes to 20, because ten nodes is not enough to test on.
Ansible could use more public relations and marketing.
I have seen indications that the documentation needs improvement. They are providing a "How to Improve Your Documentation" presentation at this conference.
The user interface on the Ansible Tower product could be better, but it is functional.
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.
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.
Some of the Cisco modules could be expanded, which would be great, along with not having to do so much coding in the background to make it work.
It is a little slow on the network side because every time you call a module, it's initiating an SSH or an API call to a network device, and it just slows things down.
There is no option to see all the servers we patch and we cannot find what the server status is. Of course, we can what has been completed and what is pending and which servers have failed, but we cannot find server status from the BMC tool. For example, is the RDP up or not. We are using separate scripts for that.
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.
Another area for improvement is group scheduling if I'm trying to do all the servers. For example, if I want to do all the 2012 Servers - since the patches are the same for all of them - I can't do so.
I would like to see more container integration in the next release of this solution.
We would like to see this solution handle more multitasking.
The number of APIs available within the tool needs improvement. At the moment, we have a couple of different scanning tools used within the organization, but only one of those is integrated back into Server Automation. There is another tool that they use in another part of the business where it doesn't have an out-of-the-box adaptor for it. We would have to go and create or develop something bespoke to be able to integrate it with that scanning tool. Whereas, with the other scanning tool, there was an API available. To make it easier, I would like to have more APIs available for different scanning tools within that line of business.
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.
Needs more use cases into compliance management and the remediation process.
Pricing and Cost Advice
Ansible Tower is free. Until they lower the cost, we are holding off on purchasing the product.
We went with product because we have a subscription for Red Hat.
The cost is high, but it still works well.
We're looking at less than $100,000 USD for this solution.
Licensing is a bit pricey. Be mindful about the components that you need and buy as appropriate.
out of 25 in Configuration Management
Average Words per Review
out of 25 in Configuration Management
Average Words per Review
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 47% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Also Known As
|TrueSight Server Automation, BladeLogic Server Automation, BladeLogic Automation Suite|
|Ansible is the simplest way to deploy your applications. It gives you the power to deploy multi-tier applications reliably and consistently, all from one common framework. You can configure needed services as well as push application artifacts from one common system.|
BladeLogic Server Automation allows you to quickly and securely provision, configure, patch, and maintain physical, virtual, and cloud servers.
· Threat remediation: Combine with BMC SecOps Response Service to link vulnerabilities to identified patches and create a remediation plan
· Compliance: Integrates role-based access control, pre-configured policies for CIS, DISA, HIPAA, PCI, SOX, NIST, and SCAP, documentation, and remediation
· Provisioning: Supports unattended installs and image-based, script-based, or template-based provisioning
· Configuration: Consistently manage change and configuration activities across a broad range of server environments with one tool
· Reporting: Assess change impact or complete an audit using multiple dashboard views
· Patching: Supports and follows maintenance window guidelines to ensure timely delivery of patches
Learn more about Ansible
Learn more about BMC TrueSight Server Automation
|HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank||State of Michigan, Fujitsu FSAS, Transamerica Life Insurance Company, SAP|
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider17%
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm25%
Comms Service Provider13%
Software R&D Company57%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm6%