We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Director and SaltStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."The reason we went with Cisco is that it comes at a very negligible cost as part of the BOQ. Compared to the competition's products, which are incredibly expensive, UCS Director is low-cost."
"An easy and strong configuration, along with its low cost, are some of the features of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the fabric sharing."
"I can manage multiple workloads whether it's on AWS, Azure, or on-premises. They can be managed by using the UCS Director."
"Feature-wise, the solution helps one to add multiple environments in one place...It is a scalable product."
"A product that really aids in systems management without complexity."
"This is a user-friendly solution that is very good and easy to use."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We monitor the configurations against CIS standards. We run CIS benchmarks and maintain configurations with higher CIS values for each server."
"SaltStack has given us the ability to deal with systems at scale and rectify issues at scale."
"The automation functionality has been most valuable. With a click of a button, we are able to automate provisioning, the build of new hardware and apply patches. These are all extremely important and differentiated tasks that can be automated in SaltStack."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to provide environmental security."
"The ability to programmatically describe the desired state of a single, or an entire fleet of servers, on-premises, and in a cloud environment."
"I want to build automation that is intelligent, part of the fabric of our environment, and is somewhat self-sustaining. I think SaltStack can help me do this."
"Currently, Cisco UCS Director is unable to integrate with another product or with a server from another brand."
"The product's pricing needs to improve."
"There could be an improvement with the integration with the newest solutions from other vendors' technologies."
"The tool should be a lot more intuitive and make it easy for us to understand and migrate."
"I would like to see more integration with other solutions."
"Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems."
"We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure."
"The product could allow more programmatic opportunities through better development of the API."
"Web UI."
"There is a little bit of pain when it comes to libraries and what is needed to run the product."
"This solution could be integrated with more hardware for an improved offering."
"Its configuration process could be better."
"SaltStack's features are minimal."
"It is difficult to set up."
"A hardened set of tests would be much appreciated."
Cisco UCS Director is ranked 24th in Cloud Management with 6 reviews while SaltStack is ranked 14th in Configuration Management with 4 reviews. Cisco UCS Director is rated 7.2, while SaltStack is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Director writes "UI and integrations should be improved; version control is problematic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SaltStack writes "Orchestration tool that powers automation of processes with the click of a button". Cisco UCS Director is most compared with Cisco Intersight, vCenter Orchestrator, VMware Aria Automation, VMware Aria Operations and vCloud Director, whereas SaltStack is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Configuration Manager, HashiCorp Terraform, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Satellite.
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.