We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"It gives us good feedback on visualizations and on how our processes have progressed."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"Self-service for developers, because they are able to deploy to development departments on their own, without needing people from operations."
"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."
"The product provides efficiency, in terms time, cost, and resources."
"The most valuable features are continuous integration and deployment, and simplicity."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CI/CD pipeline, and the testing automation."
"The build and release management features are valuable."
"Most of the features are very valuable for us, especially the source code control and task management."
"All of the features related to release management are very good."
"I like the entire tool because it is a one-stop-solution for DevOps."
"The most valuable feature is that it's fully integrated, where we have a single place to do everything that we need."
"If someone is considering developing and deploying the infrastructure in this solution, then using this tool is perfect because it's fully integrated with the pipelines and with a server core repository."
"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."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together."
"key thing is support for cloud-based deployment. That is lacking."
"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."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"While reporting in Azure DevOps is a robust capability, there's always room for enhancement, particularly in providing more granular reports."
"There is only one key area of improvement for me. The new imaging thing is that there is DevOps, where security is important because it is always lasting. So, to integrate security in our DevOps, that would be nice."
"Incorporating security tools directly into DevOps is crucial, as many existing DevOps solutions lack robust security features."
"We are facing some problems because the capacity can only be measured within a project. It cannot be measured across multiple projects. So, the reporting needs to be enhanced, and there should be more graphs to be able to easily give the upper management insights about all the employees from different departments. It will be helpful for employee management. Currently, the managers over here are using Power BI for insights because the functionality of Azure DevOps Boards is not enough. So, we have to export the data into another visualization tool and get the results."
"I can't think of any specific things at the moment, but I've run into things that I didn't like. I came across something that I wanted to be changed in DevOps, but I can't remember what it was. It was a particular feature I was looking for that I couldn't find."
"Reporting could be better. We would like to see how many applications are onboarded in DevOps and in which phase they are. We would like to know for how many applications we have done only the repository, but we have not yet done the build pipeline or deploy pipeline. Currently, there is no such report. We have to figure it out ourselves. There is no way to check how many applications are completing their build pipelines, how many applications are completing their deploy pipeline, how many are ready to use, and how many pipelines are working."
"When converting to DevOps, it was difficult to map."
"Microsoft Azure DevOps could improve by providing better integration with other tools. It is very easy to integrate with Azure, but when you need to integrate with other solutions, such as Amazon Web Services, is difficult."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Release Automation with 124 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2. 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 Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Good support, helpful management capabilities, and great Kanban boards". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with UrbanCode Deploy and Nolio Release Automation, whereas Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management.
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.
