GoCD vs Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

GoCD
Ranking in Release Automation
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (14th), Build Automation (10th)
Red Hat Ansible Automation ...
Ranking in Release Automation
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Configuration Management (1st), Network Automation (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Release Automation category, the mindshare of GoCD is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is 4.8%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Release Automation
Unique Categories:
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
0.3%
Build Automation
1.7%
Configuration Management
15.5%
Network Automation
16.9%
 

Featured Reviews

RajeshReddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 29, 2024
The UI is colorful, but the user experience must be improved
I worked for a company where we had pipelines to deploy new code and make changes in the existing infrastructure on GoCD. Another team maintains it. I was a user who used the solution to create and use the pipelines We can see all the pipelines with a simple search. The UI is colorful. The user…
SM
May 7, 2024
Makes it easy to build playbooks and saves time and resources
We are very satisfied with what we have. From a management point of view, whatever makes it easier for my team to help customers write their own playbooks would be something very beneficial. Everything is going as a service. Creating playbooks can become much more consumer-oriented so that customers do not need to contact us to write their own playbooks. It would be great to have something that can help us do that with a few clicks like all these new languages that are there today. We used to use a lot of bash scripts to do automation, but you need to be a Unix administrator for years to even figure that out. What Ansible is providing is somewhat user-friendly, but I would extend that to be even more user-friendly for customers so that they do not have to contact a technical team to write their playbooks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most notable aspect is its user interface, which we find to be user-friendly and straightforward for deploying and comprehending pipelines. We have the ability to create multiple pipelines, and in addition to that, the resource consumption is impressive."
"Permission separations mean that we can grant limited permissions for each team or team member."
"The UI is colorful."
"I like the inventory management. It's a very nice, simple, concise way to keep all that data together. And the API allows us to use it even for things that are not Ansible."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its configuration management, drift management, workflow templates with the visual UI, and graphical workflow representation."
"It was easy to read and learn. It is a YAML-based syntax, which makes it easily understand and pick up."
"Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server."
"The most valuable feature of Ansible is repeatability because when you're working at the DoD, you want things to be cookie-cutter and replicable."
"RBAC is great around Organizations and I can use that backend as our lab. Ingesting stuff into the JSON logs, into any sort of logging collector; it works with Splunk and there are other collectors as well. It supports Sumo and that helps, I can go create reports in Sumo Logic. Workflows are an interesting feature. I can collect a lot of templates and create a workflow out of them."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
 

Cons

"The documentation really should be improved by including real examples and more setup cases."
"The aspect that requires attention is the user management component. When integrating with BitLabs and authenticating through GitLab, there are specific features we desire. One important feature is the ability to import users directly from GitLab, along with their respective designations, and assign appropriate privileges based on that information. Allocating different privileges to users is a time-consuming process for us."
"The tool must be more user-friendly."
"Additional features could be added."
"Accessibility. Ansible uses a CLI by default. Those accustomed to it can find their way and adopt the YAML files easily over time. But, some users are more comfortable using UIs..."
"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."
"Some of the modules in Ansible could be a bit more mature. There is still a little room for further development. Some performance aspects could be improved, perhaps in the form of parallelism within Ansible."
"It should support more integration with different products."
"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 tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"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

"This is an open-source solution and it is inexpensive."
"It's an open-source and free tool."
"If you only need to use Ansible, it's free for any end-user, but when you require Ansible Tower, you need to pay per Ansible Tower server."
"The pricing is okay."
"The pricing for us is huge because we use twenty thousand nodes, so that is a huge infrastructure, but if someone is using a small infrastructure, then the pricing is not so much."
"The cost is high, but it still works well."
"Ansible Tower is free. Until they lower the cost, we are holding off on purchasing the product."
"We went with product because we have a subscription for Red Hat."
"It is a little pricey but it is affordable. It is not that bad."
"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 Release Automation solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Retailer
11%
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

What needs improvement with GoCD?
Jenkins is overtaking the product. The product must enhance user experience. Jenkins has everything in a simple XML format. However, GoCD is complex. Upgrading it to a simpler language would be hel...
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

Adaptive ALM, Thoughtworks Go
Ansible
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ancestry.com, Barclay Card, AutoTrader, BT Financial Group, Gamesys, Nike, Vodafone, Haufe Lexware, Medidata, Hoovers
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
Find out what your peers are saying about GoCD vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.