Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Automic Automation vs Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Automic Automation
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
101
Ranking in other categories
Workload Automation (2nd)
Red Hat Ansible Automation ...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (3rd), Configuration Management (1st), Network Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Automic Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Automic Automation is designed for Workload Automation and holds a mindshare of 7.2%, up 6.0% compared to last year.
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, on the other hand, focuses on Configuration Management, holds 16.3% mindshare, up 16.2% since last year.
Workload Automation
Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

AnkitSrivastava - PeerSpot reviewer
Good automation, handles complex jobs, and is easy to manage
We do use the solution for business-critical processes. We have a lot of complex jobs. They are using multiple databases to connect to one master. We execute jobs on multiple databases. I'm currently working with Broadcom and have created a few alert mechanisms for bug alerts. When we find bugs and report them, we can get hard fixes applied. The solution's ability to handle large volumes of data is very good. I've been happy with it. We can improve so many things by 20% or more. It's a very costly product, and the client who is paying for it needs to see results, and so far, they are. The GUI interface is very good. It's user-friendly, even for new users. Within a few days, they can learn the solution. It's easy to learn and not overly complex. In one console, we can run multiple executions and manage the load balancer, et cetera. It's very easy now to manage complex workflows using this product. We can maximize agent performance. We can execute a large number of jobs. Compared to other tools, it's much more efficient. The visibility and control is excellent. The predictive modeling provided by AI is very good. We can implement fixes automatically as well. Its predictive modeling has been very critical. Jobs are executing on this and that is very important. Even if the master is down for an hour, the company can lose millions of dollars, so having that predictability is key to managing downtime in advance. We can reduce our job workload failure rates across multiple cloud environments. For example, if we have servers and we are installing agents in the master, we can create agents on multiple servers and we can execute jobs on both agents at one time. That way, if one server goes down, there is no disruption. The jobs will execute on the second agent - and no human interface is required for the task. We've been able to save time. Previously, we were dependent upon so many team members, and it would take one week to create one console or one tool. However, now, within three or four hours, we are creating one master and agents. We save six days. It's comprehensive - but we do have an audit feature. We have a separate audit team and in the tool itself, we have audit automation so we can run audits on a quarterly basis. Sometimes we have big queries and the data is massive and difficult to manage. However, with this product, we can schedule a job and, in three months, we can get a report directly without wasting time. It's safer in terms of audit requirements. With the tool, we've been able to save on operational costs. With other tools, we had difficulty with management, and there were so many dependencies on so many teams. With one console, we can create multiple agents that run on Oracle and have one point of control with multiple features. We can run the solution on both cloud and on-prem environments. We're 90% cloud currently. However, 10% is still left on-prem. Our plan is to move 100% to the cloud.
Muralitharan KS - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient server management and detailed reporting with flexible deployment capabilities
We are primarily using Ansible for automation purposes as it is a configuration management tool. It is utilized for various activities such as DNS activity, changes to web servers, virtual host settings, and other day-to-day tasks, all of which are templated in Ansible Ansible allows us to manage…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is that I do not have to wait for one job to finish, then manually click on the next one to start. Automation is the best feature."
"The most valuable features are the predefined templates for application-specific jobs and the access for different users."
"It will increase all delivery due to an impact on efficiency, in terms of time and faster resources."
"The most valuable features are that a lot systems are supported. You can use this for z/OS, Windows, Unix, SAP, etc."
"It is not possible do our jobs without automation software. Automic is a great help to us."
"The solution is usually pretty easy for non-technical people to pick it up as long as they have basic experience with scripting."
"It is technology agnostic. It works with all the different legacy solutions we have and it allows us to look at things in one location, as opposed to going to a lot of different places."
"The monitoring and troubleshooting features are rich and with the dashboards and other features, automation work is made easier."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don’t need an agent for it to work."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
"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 solution is very simple to use."
"It is all modular-based. If there is not a module for it today, someone will write it."
"The automation is the most valuable feature."
"It's nice to have the Dashboard where people can see it, have it report to our ELK stack. It's far more convenient, and we can trigger it with API and schedules, which is better than doing it with a whole bunch of scripts."
"RBAC is great around Organizations and I can use that backend as our lab. Ingesting stuff into the JSON logs, into any sort of logging collector; it works with Splunk and there are other collectors as well. It supports Sumo and that helps, I can go create reports in Sumo Logic. Workflows are an interesting feature. I can collect a lot of templates and create a workflow out of them."
 

Cons

"In case we run into performance issues, it is sometimes hard to find out what is the real cause for it."
"The new user interface AWI could improve. It is quite easy to use and work around, but it has lost some of the functionality that we used to have in our Vim client user interface."
"An area for improvement would be SQL performance. While tracing SQL traffic, we noticed a lot of commands that cause contention/locks as well as forced waits. The efficiency of the SQL could be greatly improved (in some cases by simply replacing nested Selects and using NOLOCK hints)."
"Depending on the properties of the jobs and pre- and post-conditions, there needs to be more flexible and richer conditions that I can check for. This would be a great addition."
"The hotline can take a long time. They will say, "I will take it and give it to the Level 2 support.""
"Today, we use a rich client for this product. In the future, or for the next release, they will be using a web interface. This web interface is not as scalable as the rich client for us. The web client is not 100 percent programmed as we need it."
"Its dashboard can be improved. In version 12, they have already moved to a web-based interface from a UI. We are looking into this feature now. We are also looking for available APIs that we can use to interface the engine into our other systems. There should be a subservice facility that we can use to interface with Microsoft Teams and send out authorization on job executions. We have seen a feature like this in other products that we are looking into."
"I would not recommend using Automic's technical support for complex problems."
"It could be easier to integrate Ansible with other solutions. No single tool can do everything. For example, we use Terraform for infrastructure and other solutions for configuration management and VMs."
"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."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
"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."
"Some of the Cisco modules could be expanded, which would be great, along with not having to do so much coding in the background to make it work."
"There are challenges in using the graphical interface, particularly in open-source versions."
"Because Ansible is establishing SSH sessions to perform tasks, there is a limit on scalability."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You do not need any humans to start jobs, so you can save a lot of money."
"Its price is way up there with BMC. It is a little bit on the expensive side."
"I'm not sure about licensing costs, but I know the base price is about $3,000, and you can get some kind of discount per node."
"Automatic is heavily integrated in our organization. The cost to change would be a huge factor for us, and we have not found any other product that is better out there."
"This solution is pretty well-priced."
"We receive time efficiency from this product."
"There are a lot of new features, but we do not use them because they are too expensive. The price point could be less."
"It has helped us reduce costs."
"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."
"It’s an open-source tool."
"Users have to pay a per-node cost of around $ 100 per node."
"The pricing for us is huge because we use twenty thousand nodes, so that is a huge infrastructure, but if someone is using a small infrastructure, then the pricing is not so much."
"We went with product because we have a subscription for Red Hat."
"Ansible Tower is free. Until they lower the cost, we are holding off on purchasing the product."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Educational Organization
31%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Automic Workload Automation?
It is easy to manage complex workloads and use electronic workflow automation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automic Workload Automation?
The pricing model for Automic has changed from a host-based licensing model to one based on successful execution. I still prefer the earlier licensing model, but I understand that it was likely cha...
What needs improvement with Automic Workload Automation?
There are certain areas in Automic that need improvement, such as the complexity of workflow dependencies. When you have workflows within workflows, it can become complicated. The existing options ...
What is the difference between Red Hat Satellite and Ansible?
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 ...
How does Ansible compare to Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (SCCM)?
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 org...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform?
The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching.
 

Also Known As

Automic Dollar Universe
Ansible
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: November 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.