We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Automic Continuous Delivery Director based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."I think on a day-to-day basis, it has increased the capacity to deploy. We don't have to wait for someone to do something."
"Self-service for developers, because they are able to deploy to development departments on their own, without needing people from operations."
"Gives people insight into what's happening during the deployment."
"It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment."
"Deployment workflow (WF) can be designed this way, so that it is not necessary to provide all applications (systems) artifacts of which an application consists."
"It gives us good feedback on visualizations and on how our processes have progressed."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"Its ability to automate release deployments, streamline release scope, and reduce the cost of and time for deployment."
"CDD is primarily used for showing end users (managers, business teams, project managers, and release managers) what is happening with each release. The status and reporting features are very important. Automation reduces time to deploy. It also allows us to do more with releases and testing prior to production, better guaranteeing a smooth deployment."
"The second valuable aspect is its capability to drive external systems like deployment automation engines or to integrate with Agile Central."
"The most valuable feature for me is the fact that you can easily design a pipeline to promote applications from a development environment up to a production environment, and the team can become autonomous in designing those pipelines."
"The most valuable features of Automic Continuous Delivery Director are the UI, release planning, and tracking, and you can do your soft and hard freeze through CDP."
"Its extensive range of available connectors eliminates the need for manual code writing when implementing solutions, thus reducing coding efforts."
"There needs to be better error handling and error descriptions. It should be more clear what the errors are and what we can do to fix them."
"There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system."
"GUI for mobile phones: Availability to approve and start deployment through mobile phones."
"At the moment, the version that we are using (version 12.0), the environment is complex with multiple installations. Therefore, the monitoring is not scalable, but this should be improved in 12.1 and 12.2."
"If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details."
"One of the biggest features I've been asked by my team to put in there is opening more scripting languages to be part of the platform. There is a little bit of a learning curve in learning how to code some of the workflows in Automic at this time. If widely used languages like Perl and Python were integrated, on top of what's already there, the proprietary language, it would make it easier to on-board new resources."
"The dashboard should allow you to see the current state of packages in each environment, not only on an individual application basis, but across the entire application platform."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"We would like to have a more user-friendly interface. It is already very friendly, but as soon as you start to have many applications with many tasks, the applications should be easier to manipulate on the screen."
"We have rolled out the SAFe model, but what we would like to have is better integration with Agile Central, for instance, or at least at the plugin level, where we would select only certain stories instead of many stories in the sprint."
"Reporting and dashboarding could be improved. Release pipelines should be creatable via templates as well as easily integrable/chained together. Visual navigation could also be improved when the pipelines become too large."
"CDD and RA should be two modules in the same product. They do not automatically “talk” to each other. and they require endpoint definition."
"Automic Continuous Delivery Director can improve the integrations. We have 25 but would like more."
"The product's development has been stopped. It focuses on maintaining existing products."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Automic Continuous Delivery Director Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Automic Continuous Delivery Director is ranked 15th in Release Automation with 5 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Automic Continuous Delivery Director is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Director writes "An automation solution to automate the entire release process but lacks development". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with UrbanCode Deploy, Nolio Release Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps, whereas Automic Continuous Delivery Director is most compared with .
See our list of best Release Automation vendors.
We monitor all Release 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.