We performed a comparison between OpenText Cloud Service Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."The tool's most valuable feature is life cycle management."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Cloud Service is how user friendly the solution is."
"The most valuable feature of Ansible is repeatability because when you're working at the DoD, you want things to be cookie-cutter and replicable."
"On the network side, I already have a lot of our firewall related processes automated. If it's not automated all the way from the ticket system, our network team members, our tier-one guys in India, can just go into the Tower web interface and fill in a couple of survey questions."
"The Organizations feature, where I can give clear silos and hand them over to different teams, that's amazing; everybody says that it's their own Tower. It's like they have their own Tower out there."
"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 most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"The automation manager is very good."
"It is very easy to use, and there is less room for error."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"OpenText Cloud Service Automation needs to incorporate easier installation. It should improve skills and quality of support."
"I would like fewer restrictions as a software tester."
"The job workflow needs to be worked on. It's not really clear to how you actually link things together. What they probably could do is provide an example workflow on how to stitch things together. I think that would be very helpful."
"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."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
"The documentation for the installation step of deployment, OpenStack, etc., and these things have to be a bit more detailed."
"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."
"The support could be better."
"I have seen indications that the documentation needs improvement. They are providing a "How to Improve Your Documentation" presentation at this conference."
"It would be helpful to have templates for common configurations. It would make it much easier and faster rather than creating a whole script. The templates would decrease the learning curve as well."
More OpenText Cloud Service Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Cloud Service Automation is ranked 27th in Cloud Management with 6 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. OpenText Cloud Service Automation is rated 9.0, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Cloud Service Automation writes "Comes with life cycle management features but needs improvement in installation ". 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". OpenText Cloud Service Automation is most compared with , whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Microsoft Intune.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
