We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Release Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Gives people insight into what's happening during the deployment."
"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."
"I would say our headwind, or our time to market, is reduced considerably. We get more consistent results out of it, because you write one time and once it's automated you expect it to behave the same way every time. And it cut down a lot of re-work for us."
"We have saved on our time costs and have seen more quality."
"The metrics gathered after deployment, for example, the rate of success versus the rate of failure."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"Self-service for developers, because they are able to deploy to development departments on their own, without needing people from operations."
"It gives us good feedback on visualizations and on how our processes have progressed."
"The Organizations feature, where I can give clear silos and hand them over to different teams, that's amazing; everybody says that it's their own Tower. It's like they have their own Tower out there."
"Some colleagues and other companies use it and comment that it is easy to use, easy to understand, and offers good features."
"It increases our company's efficiency, automating all the simple tasks which used to take hours of somebody's time."
"Its checking and validating ensures our packages are properly patched."
"The automation manager is very good."
"The biggest thing I liked about Ansible is the check mode so that we can verify, after we've pushed, that the config there is actually what we intended."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"The playbooks and the code the solution uses are quite useful."
"GUI for mobile phones: Availability to approve and start deployment through mobile phones."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together."
"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."
"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."
"key thing is support for cloud-based deployment. That is lacking."
"The communication on it is not probably where it could be. We could use some real life examples where we could point customers to them and say, "This is what you are trying to do. If you follow these steps, it would at least get you started a bit quicker.""
"It would be good to make the solution more user-friendly,"
"For Ansible Tower, there are three tiers with ten nodes. I would like them to expand those ten nodes to 20, because ten nodes is not enough to test on."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
"In Community, there's a lot of effort towards testing, standardizing, and testing for module development to role development, which is why Molecule is now becoming real. Same thing with Zuul, which we are starting to implement. Zulu tests out modules from third-party sources, like ourselves, and verifies that the modules work before they are committed to the code. Currently, Ansible can't do this with all the modules out there."
"The scalability of the solution has some shortcomings."
"When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."
"What we need is model-driven, declarative software infrastructure management. However, things tend to break with new versions, requiring a lot of work to fix…The focus should be on improving the support for Ansible in the area of AI coding."
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 Nolio Release Automation and UrbanCode Deploy, 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 Automic Continuous Delivery Automation vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
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.
