We performed a comparison between AWS Control Tower and VMware Aria Automation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It provides centralized solutions for all AWS accounts in one place, customized to meet the organization's specific needs."
"AWS Control Tower helps to save a lot of work and manage multiple accounts."
"It is incredibly user-friendly and functions seamlessly."
"The most significant benefit of Control Tower is its capability to align with our organization's standards."
"It provides a central point for account management, access control, and compliance monitoring."
"Security is the most valuable feature of Control Tower."
"AWS Control Tower helps companies save costs."
"There are two features in Control Tower which are the most valuable. One is the guardrails because it has preventive and detective guardrails."
"The extensibility of it and the customization of a lot of the Blueprints, that you can customize, and the community as a whole. There's a ton of community-generated Blueprints that might be (helpful) to set up a design for your automation needs, that you can use as a base and go on from there and make changes to it."
"The DevOps for infrastructure capabilities has saved time for our developers by automating processes and reducing provisioning time. Task time has been reduced by 40 percent."
"VMware Aria Automation has made a lot of things easier. It has really helped the operations team to spin up the virtual machines."
"It has saved us a lot of time and work. It helped us to reorganize some of our service lines, so we could be more efficient. For example, on our open system server team, we had 15 people building servers, now we have two."
"We haven't hit any limits yet, scalability is good."
"vRealize Automation has improved the speed of provisioning just by automating things, making people think about whether a human really needs to do something or can we make the machines do it for us. It is a lot faster to deploy things now."
"It is mostly for our tech support to test new versions, find bugs, and troubleshoot what is happening at customer sites."
"It benefits the speed of our development, and the speed of anything we test and send through to production."
"While using the solution recently, it broke a certain activity. So, AWS Control Tower needs to consider making the solution better."
"By making APIs and organizational units more centralized, it would be simpler to pinpoint the source of issues in case of a breach and would ultimately benefit everyone involved."
"The sole drawback is its restriction to enable only one Control Tower."
"The process of closing an AWS account using Control Tower needs improvements to simplify it, especially when managing multiple accounts."
"The tool's setup is very technical. Its pricing can be cheaper."
"There aren't any additional features that I feel are missing. However, it's worth noting that Control Tower seems to function as a layer utilizing standard AWS products in the background. Occasionally, the interface may appear less streamlined, with changes in layout based on the underlying products being used. While this doesn't impact functionality, having a more standardized user interface, irrespective of the background products, could enhance the user experience."
"The solution's stability could be improved."
"It would be beneficial if AWS offered the capability to seamlessly deploy your infrastructure to another region to ensure continuous availability and redundancy."
"Our current use cases aren't very complex, but as our environment grows, we're seeing a greater need for automation. We're considering expanding our automation efforts, especially since other competitive products are starting to offer similar features."
"The connectivity between VMs is easy, but they can be made more effective if we have a single proof point where we can configure all the biggest data at a single point."
"It has some limitations for scalability, especially for remote data center management. For some components, everything need to be centralized."
"Stability has gotten a lot better. However, the vRO aspect, when you have a multi vRA head, is a little bit finicky still. vRO still needs to stay on one appliance and be one application, because, when you have two, you can't see runs on the other one that are happening when you're not logged into that one."
"With the workflow aspect, which has manual intervention, a policy needs to be approved by somebody. There could be better management of that piece with better templates. It is like a workflow engine, but does not have enough example templates to do certain things. A lot of people waste a lot of time trying to figure out the same thing, and everybody is trying to figure out the same thing, e.g., how to make a MySQL cluster in a Windows environment?"
"The stability is why I rated it a seven and not higher. There were several cases where we had to restart some services because it wasn't working correctly anymore. People cannot extend their machine or replay their machine. There is no alert to say that there is a problem and that we should stop the service. The monitoring system is not very good."
"I don't find the solution to be intuitive and user- friendly. The GUI is really complicated. Tracking down logs and errors is very hard. Then, it takes a specialized JavaScript person to build. Also, I'm not sure how the upgrades are going now, but they definitely need to evolve the upgrade process. Finally, the logs are very generalized. Giving more of an indicator of what's actually going wrong, rather than just a generic error code, would help."
"in general, it took us a long time to get it off the ground. We had a lot of issues upfront and we determined that we just needed to scrap it. I think we scrapped it two or three times before we actually got it built the way we wanted, and we're still not where we need to be. We have had downtime. There have been some issues, but we're also two iterations behind on version."
AWS Control Tower is ranked 11th in Cloud Management with 15 reviews while VMware Aria Automation is ranked 1st in Cloud Management with 133 reviews. AWS Control Tower is rated 8.2, while VMware Aria Automation is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Control Tower writes "A robust protection for efficient cloud governance and security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Automation writes "Allows for a lot of orchestration or customization within our environment to suit our customers". AWS Control Tower is most compared with AWS Trusted Advisor, Oracle Enterprise Manager Cloud Control, Morpheus and VMware Aria Cost powered by CloudHealth, whereas VMware Aria Automation is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, VMware Aria Operations, vCloud Director, Morpheus and CloudStack. See our AWS Control Tower vs. VMware Aria Automation report.
See our list of best Cloud Management vendors.
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.
