We performed a comparison between AWS Config and SaltStack 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 solution is easy to use."
"It's easy to manage."
"Configuration profiles, remediation, scripts, and auto-pilot features are very good."
"The most valuable feature is the policy CSPs."
"It has improve our organization through the remote management of non-domain joined devices."
"It provides control over all mobile devices that are being connected to the corporate network."
"The dashboards, the security, and the customization capabilities work very well for us."
"It has helped with compliance. It has helped to ensure that devices comply with the organization's policy. If they are not compliant and secure, they cannot access the resources."
"Installing the instances and performing upgrades is smooth and clean."
"The initial setup is super easy, it takes like two minutes. Literally a one-click deployment."
"The solution is scalable and provides over 100 rules."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"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."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to provide environmental security."
"SaltStack has given us the ability to deal with systems at scale and rectify issues at scale."
"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."
"We monitor the configurations against CIS standards. We run CIS benchmarks and maintain configurations with higher CIS values for each server."
"The ability to programmatically describe the desired state of a single, or an entire fleet of servers, on-premises, and in a cloud environment."
"Microsoft Intune has a latency response time issue. The latency has room for improvement."
"Microsoft Intune lacks the ability to provide seamless remote assistance or remote control."
"It's only good for a Microsoft environment."
"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."
"We need the capabilities of the Cloud Management Gateway (CMG) to be enhanced through Intune instead of Azure."
"It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation."
"The feature that allows us to import the business application from the configuration manager to Intune is not very good at this time."
"There are a couple of issues with stability."
"The reboot process for AWS instances could be improved. Microsoft Azure does not have this problem, so AWS could consider making their instances more robust. You would not need to reboot your instances frequently to replace the hardware and stuff. They can look for a better approach or mechanism to improve in the future. The concern is that you need to plan for the outage when you reboot an instance. You need to have a maintenance window where you can properly reboot the instance without affecting your application. When Amazon announces that you need to reboot an instance and are not ready, this becomes a problem."
"The solution is missing a configuration that can assist us when writing our programming languages."
"There is room for improvement in built-in tools, they are not up to the mark."
"This solution could be integrated with more hardware for an improved offering."
"Web UI."
"Its configuration process could be better."
"A hardened set of tests would be much appreciated."
"It is difficult to set up."
"There is a little bit of pain when it comes to libraries and what is needed to run the product."
"SaltStack's features are minimal."
AWS Config is ranked 15th in Configuration Management with 3 reviews while SaltStack is ranked 14th in Configuration Management with 33 reviews. AWS Config is rated 9.0, while SaltStack is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS Config writes "A cloud solution to host application with smooth instance installation and performance upgrade". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SaltStack writes "Orchestration tool that powers automation of processes with the click of a button". AWS Config is most compared with AWS Systems Manager, whereas SaltStack is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Configuration Manager, HashiCorp Terraform, Red Hat Satellite and Automic Workload Automation. See our AWS Config vs. SaltStack 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.
