We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"The capability to provide visibility to the stakeholders, to management, is the biggest piece that showcases what the solution is about."
"Gives people insight into what's happening during the deployment."
"The IT process automation is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"It is an umbrella system that allows us to integrate many different systems into our heterogeneous environment."
"It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use."
"The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it."
"I like Ansible's ease of use. If you have Linux skills, you can create a reusable template for the dependencies and other configurations. I can store the templates in a repository and share them with my customers or other developers. It's a popular solution, so there is a large user base that can share templates."
"Installing it is a PIP command. So, it's pretty easy. It is a one liner."
"Since it is in YAML, if I have to explain it to somebody else, they can easily understand it."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
"The playbooks and the code the solution uses are quite useful."
"The automation is the most valuable feature."
"It does not require staff for deployment and maintenance. It just works."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"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."
"We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"There could be more stuff in the workflows. I hope that if I have ten templates with different services on it, workflow could auto-populate all the template-based services."
"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."
"The documentation for the installation step of deployment, OpenStack, etc., and these things have to be a bit more detailed."
"There are some options not available in the community edition of the solution."
"We are not using the Dashboard a lot because we have higher expectations from it. The default Dashboard from Tower doesn't give that much information. We really want to get down into more than if the job succeeded or what was the percentage of success. We want to get down to task-level success. If, in a job, there are ten tasks, we want to see this task was a success, and this was not, and how many were not. That's the kind of granularity we are looking for, that Tower does not give right now."
"On the Dashboard, when you view a template run, it shows all the output. There is a search filter, but it would be nice to able to select one server in that run and then see all that output from just that one server, instead of having to do the search on that one server and find the results."
"From Red Hat Insights point of view, the product is not on top as it is not responding as per the demand...Like on cloud platforms, you can see the main parts of Red Hat Insights, along with the inventory of all your apps. So, that is missing in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. 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 Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with UrbanCode Deploy, Nolio Release Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps, 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.
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.
