We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Network Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 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 standout features of Intune are its excellent mobile device management and highly effective application management capabilities."
"The solution is easy to use and it has good performance."
"Users can make screenshots, and devices only need the minimal version of iOS."
"Agile and easy to deploy MDM solution that covers the maximum number of policies. Stable, scalable, and with knowledgeable technical support."
"There has been a noticeable increase in productivity for both my organization and clients."
"It has a useful device management feature."
"It's easy to manage and easy to configure."
"This product works very well for companies already using the full Microsoft suite."
"We use it to back up configurations so the configuration management is valuable for us."
"The network security of BMC TrueSight Network Automation has been the best feature."
"This product has helped us because we can now do many tasks at once. Rather than copy one file to one device, we can do an entire group at one time."
"The backup and restore configurations are really helpful for a number of network devices, as you can automate them, then know what changes have been done, who made the changes, etc. So, it's quite helpful in the network management area."
"It has the best automation features."
"The log audit and historical configurations are the most valuable feature."
"It is helpful if you schedule daily or weekly archiving for your config groups. Then, you can go by what are in those configuration groups, before and after, if you make changes. So, configuration management is really helpful in network management."
"The most valuable feature of BMC TrueSight Network Automation is compliance management, configuration backup, and configuration management."
"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."
"It enabled me to take the old build manifest and automated everything. So when it came time to spin everything up, it was quick and simple. I could spin it up and test it out. And then, when it came time to roll production, it was a done deal. When we expanded to multiple data centers, it was same thing: Change a few IP addresses, change some names, and off we went."
"It is all modular-based. If there is not a module for it today, someone will write it."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is quite stable. If you set it up correctly with the right configurations and there are no hiccups during installation and deployment, it will be stable. I'd give stability a rating of eight out of ten."
"This solution allows us to stitch a lot of different parts of the workflow together."
"It does not require staff for deployment and maintenance. It just works."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its configuration management, drift management, workflow templates with the visual UI, and graphical workflow representation."
"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."
"Intune's third-party patch management could be better. It should be easier for the average system admin to keep non-Microsoft applications updated."
"The reporting needs to be a bit more interactive."
"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."
"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."
"Reporting could be improved. It needs to be more expensive and robust."
"In the past, I raised some tickets for the enhancement feature, which was missing in Intune."
"Intune does not provide real-time visibility."
"The configuration could be better by consolidating options and making it simpler."
"They need to have a single sign-on."
"There could be automated processes to retrieve the CVS and create a compliance tool."
"I'd like to be able to get more devices into compliance with standards, but that means running additional rule sets and that takes time."
"For customized compliance, it takes some effort to implement things. If the device configuration is quite complex, then you have to do quite number of customizations in the DNA tool for out-of-the-box compliance. These regular expressions have to be modified based on the requirements of the compliance."
"I would like to see more device supported features, mostly on the new brands and models coming in. For any new version or model, it should be supported by the tool, especially the newest versions. For example, the newest devices, like Aruba Wireless, and routers need support from the tool."
"I believe there could be new features in terms of the latest technology."
"The product should be expanded to include more hardware, beyond Cisco and Juniper devices."
"We've been working with BMC support in various ways such as to allow for the high-availability components to the TSIMs to work together. There have been issues there. We've seen randomness in how other pieces of the software work. Integration with the Presentation Server and the TSIMs has been a challenge. The ports that are required for HA to be utilized were not clearly documented anywhere. In fact, they still aren't documented online anywhere, even though we managed to pull it out of some of their support people."
"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."
"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."
"The documentation for the installation step of deployment, OpenStack, etc., and these things have to be a bit more detailed."
"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."
"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."
"One problem that I'm facing right now is the mismatch between the new version of Python and Ansible. Sometimes it's Python 2, and sometimes it's Python 3. When things get a bit dicey, I wish that Ansible would solve this issue by itself. I don't want to have to specify if it is Python 3 or version 2."
"It is a little slow on the network side because every time you call a module, it's initiating an SSH or an API call to a network device, and it just slows things down."
More BMC TrueSight Network Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC TrueSight Network Automation is ranked 18th in Configuration Management with 10 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. BMC TrueSight Network Automation is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Network Automation writes "Helps with patching, OS upgrade, and security vulnerability management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". BMC TrueSight Network Automation is most compared with Cisco DNA Center and SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, 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 BMC TrueSight Network Automation vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors and best Network Automation 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.
