We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Director and SaltStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Nutanix, IBM and others in Cloud Management."This is a user-friendly solution that is very good and easy to use."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"A product that really aids in systems management without complexity."
"An easy and strong configuration, along with its low cost, are some of the features of the solution."
"The main feature of this solution is the integration with all the Cisco solutions and other vendors."
"I can manage multiple workloads whether it's on AWS, Azure, or on-premises. They can be managed by using the UCS Director."
"Feature-wise, the solution helps one to add multiple environments in one place...It is a scalable product."
"The reason we went with Cisco is that it comes at a very negligible cost as part of the BOQ. Compared to the competition's products, which are incredibly expensive, UCS Director is low-cost."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"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."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to provide environmental security."
"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 ability to programmatically describe the desired state of a single, or an entire fleet of servers, on-premises, and in a cloud environment."
"SaltStack has given us the ability to deal with systems at scale and rectify issues at scale."
"We monitor the configurations against CIS standards. We run CIS benchmarks and maintain configurations with higher CIS values for each server."
"Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems."
"It is not easy to add or expand the product."
"There could be an improvement with the integration with the newest solutions from other vendors' technologies."
"We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure."
"I would like to see more integration with other solutions."
"The tool should be a lot more intuitive and make it easy for us to understand and migrate."
"There are a lot of bugs in the solution. This is an area in the solution that can be improved."
"The product's pricing needs to improve."
"There is a little bit of pain when it comes to libraries and what is needed to run the product."
"Web UI."
"SaltStack's features are minimal."
"Its configuration process could be better."
"This solution could be integrated with more hardware for an improved offering."
"It is difficult to set up."
"A hardened set of tests would be much appreciated."
Cisco UCS Director is ranked 23rd in Cloud Management with 13 reviews while SaltStack is ranked 14th in Configuration Management with 33 reviews. Cisco UCS Director is rated 7.2, while SaltStack is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Director writes "A compact and flexible solution with a lot of features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SaltStack writes "Orchestration tool that powers automation of processes with the click of a button". Cisco UCS Director is most compared with Cisco Intersight, VMware Aria Automation, vCenter Orchestrator, VMware Aria Operations and Cisco CloudCenter, whereas SaltStack is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Configuration Manager, HashiCorp Terraform, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Satellite.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
