AutoSys Workload Automation vs Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

AutoSys Workload Automation
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Workload Automation (6th)
Red Hat Ansible Automation ...
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (3rd), Configuration Management (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of AutoSys Workload Automation is 12.8%, down from 19.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is 6.0%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
Release Automation
4.8%
Configuration Management
15.5%
 

Featured Reviews

Antony Askew - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 18, 2024
Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time
The visibility and control features are somewhat limited. This is a recognized weakness, but thee vendor is currently revamping the user interface to address it. While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement. AutoSys Workload Automation has some areas for improvement, particularly in housekeeping and product maintenance. These tasks are currently quite manual and labor-intensive for our team. Additionally, the reporting and forecasting functionalities could be more robust. One area for improvement with AutoSys Workload Automation is that it comprises several distinct tools configured to work together. This necessitates familiarity with multiple tools for effective solution management. Consequently, it can sometimes lack a sense of cohesiveness as a unified solution.
RM
May 8, 2024
Makes automation easy and helps with standardization
There should be consistency. I know that it is always changing, but when we are trying to get some users to do something in basic Ansible that they are not really interested in doing but their job requires them to do it, they start finding inconsistencies. A good example of that is that we have people who are trying to automate things with Windows and Active Directory. There is a community version of the Windows collection that deals with Active Directory. You can use a lot of that code as it is described. It works with the certified Microsoft Active Directory collection if you take the same information because there are the same parameters and values, and the only thing that changes is the collection name. If you switch that out, it does not work, so having a new person run into a problem that even a seasoned person cannot understand does not work. It turns them off. You want them to have success early on. Sometimes in Ansible, you run into some inconsistencies that you do not understand and then you are concerned because it says, "We are going to deprecate this." You are like, "How long do I have to keep using this thing that is going to be deprecated before I have to move on to this other thing?" That just does not seem to work.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"Without this product we would have to manually submit jobs and it would take longer. There would also be a much greater possibility of jobs running wrong and/or not at the right time."
"It can run an object on our Windows systems or our Unix systems, and then send messages to the other system when they are complete."
"It has helped to simplify cross-dependency between MVS and Open systems jobs."
"We use technical support all the time. We would be lost without them. They're fantastic. Really good job. We're able to reach the right person to help us out right away."
"Automation of patch process."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It is stable, it works, and it does what it is supposed to."
"The user interface is well-built and very easy to navigate around."
"Some colleagues and other companies use it and comment that it is easy to use, easy to understand, and offers good features."
"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."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is quite stable. If you set it up correctly with the right configurations and there are no hiccups during installation and deployment, it will be stable. I'd give stability a rating of eight out of ten."
"Since it is in YAML, if I have to explain it to somebody else, they can easily understand it."
"It has improved our organization through provisioning and security hardening. When we do get a new VM, we have been able to bring on a provisioned machine in less than a day. This morning alone, I provisioned two machines within an hour. I am talking about hardening, installing antivirus software on it, and creating user accounts because the Playbooks were predesigned. From the time we got the servers to the actual hand-off, it takes less than an hour. We are talking about having the servers actually authenticate Red Hat Satellites and run the yum updates. All of that can be done within an hour."
"It has an easy-to-use interface. It is REST API driven, and it integrates with Active Directory. It provides the ability to grant permissions to other users who would not necessarily have those permissions via the GUI so that they could run other people's jobs. For example, you could have the Oracle team grant permissions to the Linux team so that they can use each of those playbooks or each other's code. It is called shift-left."
"It's nice to have the Dashboard where people can see it, have it report to our ELK stack. It's far more convenient, and we can trigger it with API and schedules, which is better than doing it with a whole bunch of scripts."
 

Cons

"The visibility and control features are somewhat limited."
"​A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that.​"
"This product needs to improve its graphical user interface."
"Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types."
"Reduce the number of operational files. This would make the job of a system programmer supporting ESP easier."
"The WCC could be improved."
"I would like to see the Service Orchestrator, a B2B product, and maybe a process audit."
"There is a slow response time by tech support. Unless, you say it's severity level one. That will give you a two hour timing window for them to call you. It doesn't really happen exactly in two hours, but they try."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"The product could do a better job at building infrastructure."
"It would be good to make the solution more user-friendly,"
"Networking needs to be improved."
"The governance features could be improved."
"If we have a problem with some file and we need to get Red Hat to analyze the issue and the file is 100GBs, we'll have an issue since we need to provide a log file for them to analyze. If it is around 12GB or 13GB, we can easily upload it to the Red Hat portal. With more than 100GBs, it will fail. I heard it should cover up to 250GB for an upload, however, I find it fails. Therefore, Red Hat needs to provide a way to handle this."
"The support could be better."
"There should be consistency. I know that it is always changing, but when we are trying to get some users to do something in basic Ansible that they are not really interested in doing but their job requires them to do it, they start finding inconsistencies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I certainly think the pricing is worth the value."
"The pricing needs to be improved. Some of my client's complained that it was too expensive."
"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."
"People need to pay attention to how they use their ESP agents on the distributed platform. That's where some of the cost comes in, based on how many you need or how many you use."
"It is overpriced."
"I don't have information on the exact licensing cost of AutoSys Workload Automation because that's managed by the tools and financing teams. For agents, it's close to $4,00, but for the server setup, it's usually a one-time license initially, and it's AMC which is paid every year and comes close to $8,000 to $10,000."
"We paid to use the solution monthly."
"The price of this solution is reasonable and there is an annual license required."
"Users have to pay a per-node cost of around $ 100 per node."
"I don't see the pricing or licensing features, but from what I understand, it is fairly reasonable."
"Ansible Tower is pretty expensive."
"We have to be mindful of how we use Ansible because of the licensing model. I am not saying that it is unfair or we do not find value in it. Because we are trying to automate so many different things, we have to be mindful of what we are doing and how we are doing it because we are trying to stay in compliance with it."
"Like many Red Hat products, they have a no-cost version of the web application (AWX, formerly Ansible Tower), but you are on your own to install and it is a little more complicated than just installing Ansible."
"You don't need to buy agents on servers or deploy expense management when using the solution, which affected our decision to go with it."
"The pricing is pretty standard."
"Red Hat's open source approach was a factor when choosing Ansible, since the solution is free as of right now."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
46%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
Educational Organization
26%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about AutoSys Workload Automation?
The most valuable aspects of AutoSys Workload Automation are its performance, scalability, and ease of getting started for new users.
What is the difference between Red Hat Satellite and Ansible?
Red Hat Satellite has proven to be a worthwhile investment for me. Both its patch management and license management have been outstanding. If you have a large environment, patching systems is much ...
How does Ansible compare to Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (SCCM)?
Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager takes knowledge and research to properly configure. The length of time that the set up will take depends on the kind of technical architecture that your org...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform?
The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching.
 

Also Known As

CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE
Ansible
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: June 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.