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."Inherit Dependencies feature reduces scheduling errors for holiday processing."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows."
"It scales very well. We can add jobs and remove jobs. We do not have problems maintaining the product across multiple environments and multiple servers."
"It has allowed us to automate many of the functions of our operations staff. For instance, we had production control staff spending two hours a day entering date parms into our daily business processes. And now, CA Workload Automation does it for us."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"Being a game-changer in configuration management software is what has made Ansible so popular and widespread. Much of IT is based on SSH direct connectivity with a need for running infrastructure in an agentless way, and that has been a big plus. SSH has become a great security standard for managing servers. The whole thing has really become an out-of-the-box solution for managing a Unix estate."
"There are no agents by default, so adding a new server is a matter of a couple lines of configuration (on a new server and the configuration master)."
"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 initial setup is straightforward."
"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."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"They could do better supporting it. They have too many of the same type of products, so sometimes it doesn't get as much attention as it should."
"We had a few issues, however, the issues were more on the infrastructure rather than with the application itself."
"We have to escalate through channels to get to somebody who knows what's going on. It takes time that we do not necessarily have."
"Ease of implementation for upgrades."
"To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with."
"There is a difference between a web interface and the thick client interface. We particularly like a thick client interface, and it has gone away."
"The graphical interface can be improved."
"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."
"Networking needs to be improved."
"It needs better documentation."
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
"I have seen indications that the documentation needs improvement. They are providing a "How to Improve Your Documentation" presentation at this conference."
"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."
"The user interface on the Ansible Tower product could be better, but it is functional."
"There needs to be improvement in the orchestration."
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, Automic Workload Automation and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Control-M.
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.
