We performed a comparison between HashiCorp Terraform and SUSE Manager 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 has reduced the risk of security breaches by 30%."
"The most valuable feature is the UEM capabilities."
"It's very informative when there is an error. It allows us to backtrace where the error is and resolve that ourselves. It's a bit of a Swiss Army penknife. We find that it fixes most issues."
"Easy to use."
"Remote Wipe and Autopilot is one of the best features."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"I like the tool's integration with Apple. Anyone who creates an ID in Intune will get an Apple ID."
"It has a useful device management feature."
"It's very easy to automate functions on the cloud with HashiCorp Terraform. The commands are easy as well."
"The most valuable features of Terraform are leveraging public modules for EKS, KMS, and ECR."
"The solution helps us save a lot of costs."
"Provides automation which has increased our efficiency."
"It allows for the abstraction of the work away from the developer into automated processes."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the modules it offers."
"Can be used across multiple cloud providers and multiple platforms."
"The most valuable feature of Terraform is the ability to use it as a coding language because it works in a way that's similar to other coding languages."
"The setup is straightforward."
"SUSE Manager helps to optimize operations at a reduced cost."
"SUSE Manager is the best solution for maintaining the Linux environment"
"When it comes to managing both Red Hat and SUSE environments, it provides the support for live patching, which is something I really, really appreciate."
"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."
"While Intune works perfectly well, the only potential downside is that the deployment could be a bit complex for some users."
"The reporting and cost have room for improvement."
"The mobile and tablet-based versions need improvement because they are not completely user-friendly, compared to the web version. Also, data synchronization with our existing asset manager, the synchronization between multiple assets and multiple devices, takes a lot of time due to the security scanning. It should be reduced."
"Some enrollment features could be improved."
"Technical support is not that great."
"Intune should be much more granular in terms of supporting more Android cellular devices."
"There can be more logs. I do not have any other requirements."
"The error logging could be better. Sometimes, when you try to set something on Terraform, it gives you an error, but you don't understand how the error has been logged."
"On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven; strictly because I was uncomfortable using the ARM template earlier. After another six months, I am sure I will give it a rating of 10, but at this point in time in my experience, I say seven, but not because of the tool itself."
"With cloud providers always adding new resource types, there are certain resources that Terraform does not support. It would be great if it could support those resources as well."
"The solution is complex when we use it for a loop. This is a problem, not because of the language itself, but because of how the infrastructure generally works. It's different from Python."
"When a misconfiguration or drift occurs, fixing the issue can be difficult. For instance, if there is a change in API calls while a script is running, it can be challenging to make corrections. This may require additional review and modifications to the code. I recall an instance where an industry budget creation process was altered, and it took significant time to amend the code. In fact, I had to add five or six different script portions to resolve the issue."
"I would like to see a short-term option for a short-term plan."
"The product can integrate and utilize more services from different competitors. Currently, their commands are quite similar to Kubernetes, which we use in our CI/CD pipeline. Also, they should consider incorporating Windows command line, like PowerShell."
"Lacks flexibility in common programming languages."
"We sometimes have server issues and need to restart the service."
"It can be complex and difficult for users who are new to Linux and don't have any technical expertise."
"The initial stage is a bit complex, but after that, everything runs seamlessly."
"I really would like to have a broader library of VCP's or playbooks that I can deploy."
HashiCorp Terraform is ranked 6th in Configuration Management with 38 reviews while SUSE Manager is ranked 13th in Configuration Management with 4 reviews. HashiCorp Terraform is rated 8.6, while SUSE Manager is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HashiCorp Terraform writes "Easy to use, technically strong, and great for multi-provider or multi-cloud environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE Manager writes "Easy to deploy, offers embedded monitoring, and is very stable". HashiCorp Terraform is most compared with SaltStack, Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor, whereas SUSE Manager is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Microsoft Configuration Manager. See our HashiCorp Terraform vs. SUSE Manager 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.