IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Control-M vs Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Buyer's Guide
Process Automation
July 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Camunda, Pega and others in Process Automation. Updated: July 2022.
620,068 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced.""We can set up automated email notifications to the programmers or the whole team for a particular job. It helps save time because we're not consistently looking at the job to see if it has ended or failed.""It is an enterprise tool that integrates with all the applications in our organization. It has made our life easier because we don't need to wake up at midnight and do monitoring, etc. It does everything. It also sends precautionary alerts. If a job or activity is running for more than the specified time, it alerts the application team. So, our teams do not need to sit in front of a laptop or any open application to watch the jobs. They can do their other regular activities while Control-M takes care of all the jobs. It notifies them when there is job completion, delay, and error.""The scheduling feature and scheduling tool are the most valuable features. I like the scheduling services that we have in Control-M, which are very beneficial to our organization because they are automating things. There is also less manual work. We can schedule a task without any manual interruptions.""The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the features and perform various tasks.""Technical support is very helpful and available 24/7.""In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7.""Our data transfers have improved using Control-M processes, e.g., our monthly batches. When we used to do things manually, like copying files and reports, we used to take three to four days to complete a batch. However, with the automated file transfers and report sharing, we have been able to complete a batch within two and a half days and our reports are on time to users. So, 30% to 40% of the execution time has been saved."

More Control-M Pros →

"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.""There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it.""Being a game-changer in configuration management software is what has made Ansible so popular and widespread. Much of IT is based on SSH direct connectivity with a need for running infrastructure in an agentless way, and that has been a big plus. SSH has become a great security standard for managing servers. The whole thing has really become an out-of-the-box solution for managing a Unix estate.""Ansible is agentless. So, we don't need to set up any agent into the computer we are interacting with. The only prerequisite is that the host with which we are going to interact must have the Python interpreter installed on it. We can connect to a host and do our configuration by using Ansible.""One of the most valuable features is automation. We are doing automation infrastructure, which allows us to automate regular tasks. This solution provides us with a service catalog, like building new services and automating daily tasks.""Ansible provides great reliability when coupled with a versioning system (git). It helps providing predictability to the network by knowing exactly what's being pushed after validating it in production.""The solution can scale.""One of the most valuable features is that Ansible is agentless. It does not have dependencies, other than Python, which is very generic in terms of dependencies for all systems and for any environment. Being agentless, Ansible is very convenient for everything."

More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pros →

Cons
"Everybody's biggest gripe is the reporting capability option. It is a gripe because there is a lot of information in Control-M, but the solution doesn't have a good reporting tool to extract that information. Now, if you want all that information, you need to rely on another third-party BI tool to extract the information out of Control-M.""Its installation can be better. Currently, we have to install it manually. The file transfer feature can also be improved. It is not very easy to transfer a file from business to business. In terms of new features, they can include new technologies. It can have API integration.""Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features.""I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product.""They can improve their interface.""Its operations and infrastructure can be improved.""An issue we have run into in our lower environments is that Control-M can log you out frequently.""I would like to see more audit report templates added, and perhaps more customizability in terms of reporting."

More Control-M Cons →

"Improvements should be made in terms of execution speed, which is, I believe, the most lacking feature. Aside from that, re-triggering a failed task is another useful feature.""Ansible has just been upgraded, and the only issue that we are seeing at the moment is that the user interface can be slow. We're currently investigating the refresh period with Red Hat when you click a job and run a job. It seems that the buffer no longer runs in real-time. We haven't discovered whether that's partially an issue with our environment, but Red Hat has come back and said that they're working on a couple of bugs in the background. We've upgraded to that version in the last six months, and that's the only issue that we've seen.""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.""We would like support for the post-integration of this product before cloud frameworks because right now their approach is to avoid using on-premises activities and move everything to the cloud.""Ansible is great, but there are not many modules. You can do about 80% to 90% of things by using commands, but more modules should be added. We cannot do some of the things in Ansible. In Red Hat, we have the YUM package manager, and there are certain options that we can pass through YUM. To install the Docker Community Edition, I'll write the yum install docker-ce command, but because the Docker Community Edition is not compatible with RHEL 8, I will have to use the nobest option, such as yum install docker-ce --nobest. The nobest option installs the most stable version that can be installed on a particular system. In Ansible, the nobest option is not there. So, it needs some improvements in terms of options. There should be more options, keywords, and modules.""When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control.""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...""They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."

More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
  • "This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."
  • "The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
  • "You're going to spend a lot of money upfront, but the benefits you're going to get out of it are going to quickly pay for it."
  • "Initially, our licensing model was based on the number of jobs per day. That caused some issues because we were restricted to a number. So at our renewal time we said, 'We want to convert from number of jobs to number of endpoints.' That cost us extra money but it gave us additional capabilities, without worrying about the number of jobs."
  • "BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
  • "You must accept that BMC licensing can be very confusing. No one can easily understand how they calculate things, whether it is user-based, job-based, or server-based. The calculation is quite tough. How BMC calculates licensing is not easily available anywhere."
  • "There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
  • More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Red Hat's open source approach was a factor when choosing Ansible, since the solution is free as of right now."
  • "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."
  • "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 cost is determined by the number of endpoints."
  • "We're charged between $8 to $13 a month per license."
  • "I don't see the pricing or licensing features, but from what I understand, it is fairly reasonable."
  • More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
    620,068 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:Hi! I don't know the "Oracle DAC Scheduler", but I can say that in most competitive solutions Control-m stands out in the following points: 1- One of the oldest job scheduling solutions on the… more »
    Top Answer:The reporting is top-notch. I haven't found any other applications on the market that can replicate what Control-M offers. The alerting is very good, and I think their service monitoring is the best… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer: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 provisional machine in less than a day. This morning alone, I… more »
    Ranking
    1st
    out of 39 in Process Automation
    Views
    32,250
    Comparisons
    13,202
    Reviews
    45
    Average Words per Review
    1,412
    Rating
    8.9
    2nd
    Views
    31,054
    Comparisons
    24,387
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    1,268
    Rating
    8.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    Ansible
    Learn More
    Overview

    Control-M simplifies application and data workflow orchestration on premises or as a service. It makes it easy to build, define, schedule, manage, and monitor production workflows, ensuring visibility, reliability, and improving SLAs.

    • Accelerate new business applications into production—by embedding workflow orchestration into your CI/CD pipeline
    • Scale Dev and Ops collaboration, with a Jobs-as-Code approach
    • Simplify workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform integrations
    • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster, managing big data workflows in a scalable way
    • Take control of your file transfer operations with integrated, intelligent file movement and visibility
    Ansible is the simplest way to deploy your applications. It gives you the power to deploy multi-tier applications reliably and consistently, all from one common framework. You can configure needed services as well as push application artifacts from one common system.
    Offer
    Learn more about Control-M
    Learn more about Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
    Sample Customers
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm31%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Retailer8%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company30%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Insurance Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Healthcare Company22%
    Comms Service Provider17%
    Government11%
    Legal Firm11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company22%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Government8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise77%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business27%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Process Automation
    July 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Camunda, Pega and others in Process Automation. Updated: July 2022.
    620,068 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Control-M is ranked 1st in Process Automation with 48 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 9 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "Allows us to integrate file transfers more readily, resolve issues quickly, and orchestrate a diverse landscape of vendor products". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Enables us to efficiently manage an almost unlimited number of nodes". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation ESP, Automic Workload Automation and Stonebranch Universal Automation Center, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager, Red Hat Satellite, VMware vRealize Automation (vRA), Microsoft Azure DevOps and Cisco DNA Center.

    We monitor all Process Automation 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.