We performed a comparison between OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Microsoft, HCLTech and others in Configuration Management."The ability to (somewhat) manage full Windows 10 computers including EXE-based or MSI-based application deployments using Azure Active Directory as Identity."
"We are using the mobile feature, and we are also using MDM to lock the devices, to push restrictions, et cetera"
"Conditional access has helped us tailor and enforce our security policies in the mobile space."
"Conditional access helps me control uncontrolled access."
"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."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"The product has eased the deployment of Microsoft apps to the devices. We can manage it properly. We can control it and push the updates. Another company helped us with the deployment. However, we can do it internally."
"The stability is good."
"Helps me perform changes in connected infrastructure thanks to the discovery features."
"The most valuable feature is the impact analysis."
"Having the Dashboard from an admin point of view, and seeing how all the projects and all the jobs lay out, is helpful."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"Installing it is a PIP command. So, it's pretty easy. It is a one liner."
"The user interface is well-built and very easy to navigate around."
"The automation is the most valuable feature."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"We can manage all the configuration consistency between all our servers."
"The installation is very easy. However, to be able to configure it you will need special knowledge, such as training or self-studies to have a proper level of security. There are many settings one has to understand before being able to implement Microsoft Intune."
"It should be simplified. I've worked with many different mobile device management solutions, and Intune is one of the more complex ones. It could be more simplified, and some of it is related to the wording that is being used, such as a configuration profile versus a policy. They really should have had different names to make it less confusing."
"They should improve its compatibility with other operating systems such as iOS and Linux. It supports Linux but they still need to work on the iOS part."
"The reporting is subpar. That's the only issue we have with Intune. We use another solution for that purpose."
"I think there should be a better tracking of the cell phones used on the Intune."
"Intune has some limitations when it comes to application updates for third-party applications. You can schedule an update, but when it's a package setup, you need to supercede and replace it each time."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy custom packages as a Windows 64-bit package, as opposed to the Windows 32-bit, which is the only one available now."
"In the next release, I would like a feature to be able to properly lock down the device. For example, if an attacker or somebody steals the phone, you can be sure that the pin cannot be broken."
"The native UI should be simplified because it is outdated and a little bit over-complicated."
"For Ansible Tower, there are three tiers with ten nodes. I would like them to expand those ten nodes to 20, because ten nodes is not enough to test on."
"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..."
"In Community, there's a lot of effort towards testing, standardizing, and testing for module development to role development, which is why Molecule is now becoming real. Same thing with Zuul, which we are starting to implement. Zulu tests out modules from third-party sources, like ourselves, and verifies that the modules work before they are committed to the code. Currently, Ansible can't do this with all the modules out there."
"Networking needs to be improved."
"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."
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is not the best at server provisioning. Terraform is better."
"What I'm trying to figure out, personally, is, when doing mass updates, how I can parallelize that a little bit better. It seems right now - and maybe, it's a shortcoming on my end - that I run through one set of servers, and then another set of servers, ad then another set of servers, but it seems like I could throw a lot of these checks out. Different types of servers, like web servers and DB servers, if I could parallelize that a little bit to make everything run a little bit more efficiently, that would help."
More OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is ranked 21st in Configuration Management while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management writes "It allows us to deploy applications and primitive desktops globally. The upgrade cycle is very long". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Quest KACE Systems Management and BigFix, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and BMC TrueSight Server Automation.
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.
