We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and UrbanCode Deploy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."Role-based access control and agentless architecture are the main features which may attract users."
"There are no agents by default, so adding a new server is a matter of a couple lines of configuration (on a new server and the configuration master)."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"The automation manager is very good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"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."
"I like Ansible's ease of use. If you have Linux skills, you can create a reusable template for the dependencies and other configurations. I can store the templates in a repository and share them with my customers or other developers. It's a popular solution, so there is a large user base that can share templates."
"The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching."
"Stable solution that's good for automating the CI/CD pipeline: from development to production."
"The stability is good. I haven't experienced any issues."
"The solution handles complex deployments very efficiently."
"The most valuable feature is the snapshot functionality, which allows us to access previous versions of the artifacts."
"The most valuable functionality is the ability to define the deployment process, schedule the deployment and automatically execute the deployments to different environments."
"It is very easy to make a software release. It used to take us at least a couple of hours to make a release, now we went to production with a new one last night. This new release took me five minutes."
"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."
"What I would like to see is a refined Dashboard to see, when I log in: Here are all my jobs, here are how many times they've executed; some kind graphical stitching-together of the workflows and jobs, and how they're connected. Also, those "failed hosts," what does that mean? We have a problem, a failed host can be anything. Is SSH the reason it failed? Is the job template why it failed? It doesn't really distinguish that."
"Documentation could be improved. Many times, if I'm looking for something, I have to Google it in a lot of places, then figure out what the best approach will be. There are some best practices documents, but they don't give you the information."
"There are some options not available in the community edition of the solution."
"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."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is not the best at server provisioning. Terraform is better."
"It would be helpful to have templates for common configurations. It would make it much easier and faster rather than creating a whole script. The templates would decrease the learning curve as well."
"The scalability of the solution has some shortcomings."
"The interface allows access in a number of ways but that can be confusing."
"I would like to have the agent up and running at all times, as opposed to only while it is in the DevOps pipeline."
"I would like to see more reporting for container architecture."
"I certainly would like to have a better way to pass information between deployment steps using UrbanCode Deploy because that's really difficult to do."
"The technical support of the solution could definitely be improved as PMRs take long to resolve."
"The scalability of this application needs improvement. Changes and variations in the application become bottlenecks as they need to be more seamless and comfortable."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews while UrbanCode Deploy is ranked 6th in Release Automation with 27 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while UrbanCode Deploy is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UrbanCode Deploy writes "It offers OOTB plugins for middleware". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and OpenText Operations Orchestration, whereas UrbanCode Deploy is most compared with GitLab, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Octopus Deploy, HCL Launch and BMC Release Lifecycle Management.
See our list of best Release Automation vendors.
We monitor all Release 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.
