Compare Ansible vs. Control-M

Ansible is ranked 3rd in Configuration Management with 24 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. Ansible is rated 8.4, while Control-M is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Ansible writes "Check mode enables us to verify that the config we have pushed is what we intended". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "File transfer module is quite advanced, this version has less need for written programs and is more GUI-based". Ansible is most compared with SCCM, BigFix and Red Hat Satellite, whereas Control-M is most compared with CA Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ansible Logo
22,454 views|17,963 comparisons
Control-M Logo
27,294 views|11,793 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: October 2019.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
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.

Read more »

I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets.The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools.Most of our tasks also deal with databases, and Control-M's purpose-built module for the databases comes in very handy when handling database components.BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us.The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology.The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice.It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic.Monitoring is a valuable aspect of it. The monitoring tool is very good, and it is easy for expert and entry level users to use on a short notice.

Read more »

Cons
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.

Read more »

There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly.The next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client.A developer sandbox could be very helpful to try out new features or experience them.The Control-M API does not support SQL database-type jobs, where a job has been configured to use the SQL catalog to locate SSIS.Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support.I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product.I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data.The reporting tool still needs a lot of improvement. It was supposed to get better with the upgrade, and it really didn't get better. It needs help, because it's such a useful thing to have. It needs to be more powerful and easier to use.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

Licensing costs are around $3000 a year.Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for.It works on task-based licensing.This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations.We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing.As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost.We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost.we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
3rd
Views
22,454
Comparisons
17,963
Reviews
25
Average Words per Review
473
Avg. Rating
8.4
1st
out of 22 in Workload Automation
Views
27,294
Comparisons
11,793
Reviews
21
Average Words per Review
536
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Also Known As
Control-M
Learn
Red Hat
BMC
Overview
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.

Control‑M is a digital enterprise management solution that simplifies and automates diverse batch application workloads while reducing failure rates, improving SLAs, and accelerating application deployment. 

Automate job scheduling and application deployment

  • Connect applications and workflow processes to quickly and reliably deliver business services
  • Realize the potential of big data while freeing IT for other tasks
  • Take control of your file transfer operations with secure scheduling, instant status visibility, and automated recovery
  • Accelerate application change and deployment cycle times with automated application workflow between test and production
  • Empower users to make decisions in real time and perform basic tasks in a view and language they understand
  • Deploy Control-M on-premises or on the cloud
Offer
Learn more about Ansible
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBankCARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company27%
Comms Service Provider18%
Government9%
Financial Services Firm9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider10%
Government8%
Financial Services Firm7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm43%
Healthcare Company9%
Retailer9%
Insurance Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company37%
Financial Services Firm10%
Marketing Services Firm10%
Comms Service Provider7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business26%
Midsize Enterprise6%
Large Enterprise68%
REVIEWERS
Small Business9%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise77%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise1%
Large Enterprise98%
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: October 2019.
378,809 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email