We performed a comparison between AWS CloudFormation and Chef based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult."
"It's easy to deploy a configuration or policy to a system, especially when you don't have Azure AD. Now we are talking to all these small and medium-sized customers who don't necessarily have an on-premise Windows Active Directory. If they have invested in Office 365 Premium, this functionality becomes available to them."
"Being able to manage the devices remotely is most valuable. We can push security requirements through Microsoft Intune."
"While I don't think you can ever have full visibility and control, Intune certainly allows us to see the applications being used and tells us if things like Windows patches aren't applied to machines. It does a good job. That visibility makes life a little easier."
"For Windows services, there are multiple options within Intune to modernize it to be more internet-facing and dynamic."
"This product works very well for companies already using the full Microsoft suite."
"Technical support, in general, has been quite helpful."
"The main advantage is that Intune performs its intended functions effectively."
"There is a cost-benefit to using CloudFormation that comes about because of the automation that it provides."
"The solution has helped with automation. I don't have to worry about provisioning machines and ensuring everything is set up. AWS CloudFormation takes care of the entire infrastructure for me."
"What I like best about AWS CloudFormation is that it is a quick and simple way to deploy various applications, like WordPress."
"Versioning makes our work easy."
"The most valuable feature of AWS CloudFormation is the simple tracking of infrastructure."
"Since AWS CloudFormation integrates well with the AWS platform, it facilitates faster deployment. Building templates for AWS services within the solution is also straightforward, making the process easier."
"The reusability of the solution is valuable."
"The nested stacks would be one of the more valuable features."
"This solution has improved my organization in the way that deployment has become very quick and orchestration is easy. If we have thousands of servers we can easily deploy in a small amount of time. We can deploy the applications or any kind of announcements in much less time."
"Chef is a great tool for an automation person who wants to do configuration management with infrastructure as a code."
"We have had less production issues since using Chef to automate our provisioning."
"I wanted to monitor a hybrid cloud environment, one using AWS and Azure. If I have to provision/orchestrate between multiple cloud platforms, I can use Chef as a one-stop solution, to broker between those cloud platforms and orchestrate around them, rather than going directly into each of the cloud-vendors' consoles."
"The most valuable feature is the language that it uses: Ruby."
"You set it and forget it. You don't have to worry about the reliability or the deviations from any of the other configurations."
"Deployment has become quick and orchestration is now easy."
"Chef can be scaled as needed. The Chef server itself can scale but it depends on the available resources. You can upgrade specific resources to meet the demand. Similarly, with clients, you can add as many clients as you need. Again, this depends on the server resources. If the server has enough resources, it can handle the number of servers required to manage the infrastructure. Chef can be scaled to meet the needs of the infrastructure being managed."
"It would be good if, in addition to the minimal patching and compliance, we could also use Intune for application deployment. For instance, if a device is not patched, Intune should have the ability to push not only a Microsoft patch but also other patches, such as a browser patch."
"It would be better if they can reduce the cost of the license."
"Intune does not provide real-time visibility."
"The reporting could be improved, as it's pretty poor compared to other products of this type."
"Lacks the ability to deploy more ways of management, managing devices and processing the policies."
"The difficulty of the the roll out is surprisingly difficult considering this product is supposed to be an integrated part of the 365 suite."
"I expect Microsoft Intune to have more features in the cloud because there are two major functionalities that we need to be added. This is software metering and license management. These functionalities, for now, must be on-premise. For this purpose, we have set up a SQL Server and I hope that in near future this option will be in the cloud in Microsoft Intune."
"The documentation about the custom image setup could be better. Although Microsoft provides the steps to configure Intune or set up or deploy Intune, it doesn't have much information related to custom images. If you ask, "how can we deploy the custom image?" There is no information. The steps they mention ask you to connect to your on-premises environment or create your own image on the cloud itself once there is connectivity. But I needed to go to multiple websites to get all this information. I had to figure out how to upload the custom image if you want to use the on-premise custom image for Cloud PC. If you have the proper subscription, you must have the right access, like global admin or owner. Then you can add your custom image to that. There are no steps mentioned over there. Microsoft Intune doesn't have Chrome browser support. I would like to have that support because they will want it if we pitch the product to clients."
"The solution must enable more hands-on designing of the templates."
"The speed of the replication process could improve. It can take some time to replicate that could use a speed increase."
"There could be better error handling. It would be a good way to improve the solution."
"As soon as they manage to parametrize the whole thing and to implement parameters at all levels, it will become automatically a lot more flexible."
"The solution needs to offer better support to other cloud vendors."
"Provisioning a large environment or a large number of services takes a bit more time than with Terraform."
"Including certain examples of templates would be advantageous."
"If you are a developer or a more technical person, it's very difficult to learn the complete syntax or because CloudFormation includes a new way to write infrastructure code."
"If only Chef were easier to use and code, it would be used much more widely by the community."
"Chef could get better by being more widely available, adapting to different needs, and providing better documentation."
"The time that it takes in terms of integration. Cloud integration is comparatively easy, but when it comes to two-link based integrations - like trying to integrate it with any monitoring tools, or maybe some other ticketing tools - it takes longer. That is because most of the out-of-the-box integration of the APIs needs some revisiting."
"Vertical scalability is still good but the horizontal, adding more technologies, platforms, tools, integrations, Chef should take a look into that."
"There is a slight barrier to entry if you are used to using Ansible, since it is Ruby-based."
"If they can improve their software to support Docker containers, it would be for the best."
"In the future, Chef could develop a docker container or docker images."
"I would like them to add database specific items, configuration items, and migration tools. Not necessarily on the builder side or the actual setup of the system, but more of a migration package for your different database sets, such as MongoDB, your extenders, etc. I want to see how that would function with a transition out to AWS for Aurora services and any of the RDBMS packages."
AWS CloudFormation is ranked 9th in Configuration Management with 23 reviews while Chef is ranked 15th in Configuration Management with 18 reviews. AWS CloudFormation is rated 8.2, while Chef is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS CloudFormation writes "Pretty easy setup with great automations for provisioning that save time and money". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Chef writes "Useful for large infrastructure, reliable, but steep learning cureve". AWS CloudFormation is most compared with AWS Systems Manager, Spring Cloud, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Red Hat Satellite and Microsoft Configuration Manager, whereas Chef is most compared with Jenkins, AWS Systems Manager, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our AWS CloudFormation vs. Chef report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration 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.
