We performed a comparison between Digital.ai Deploy and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Release Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This product is an innovative market leader in the field of application deployment."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is vendor-agnostic and it has a file called Manifest, which makes it possible for developers, ops people, and system admins to cooperate."
"The solution creates a manifest file that caps the bridge between the developer and the system admin."
"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."
"I like the fact that Ansible is agentless."
"Feature-wise, the solution is a good open-source software offering broad support. Also, it's reliable."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"The most valuable feature of Ansible is repeatability because when you're working at the DoD, you want things to be cookie-cutter and replicable."
"It is very easy to use, and there is less room for error."
"Automation tracking is the most valuable feature."
"Managing our inventory is a big pain point. Right now, we have Satellite, but we can tie it in with Satellite, so we can actually manage things and automate the entire deployment stack, instead of trying to grab things from tickets, then generating Kickstart, and using that to get things in Satellite. That doesn't work well. We can do the whole deployment stack using the inventory share between Tower and Satellite."
"The tool needs to improve on cloud-native GitOps."
"While it is a flexible product and provides a means of integrating with virtually anything, the company should make a better effort to keep up with new platform integrations."
"The solution currently has a bug that causes performance issues. They need to resolve this in a future release."
"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."
"We are very satisfied with what we have. From a management point of view, whatever makes it easier for my team to help customers write their own playbooks would be something very beneficial. Everything is going as a service. Creating playbooks can become much more consumer-oriented so that customers do not need to contact us to write their own playbooks."
"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."
"When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."
"I have seen indications that the documentation needs improvement. They are providing a "How to Improve Your Documentation" presentation at this conference."
"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."
"If we have a problem with some file and we need to get Red Hat to analyze the issue and the file is 100GBs, we'll have an issue since we need to provide a log file for them to analyze. If it is around 12GB or 13GB, we can easily upload it to the Red Hat portal. With more than 100GBs, it will fail. I heard it should cover up to 250GB for an upload, however, I find it fails. Therefore, Red Hat needs to provide a way to handle this."
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Digital.ai Deploy is ranked 13th in Release Automation with 11 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 62 reviews. Digital.ai Deploy is rated 7.4, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Digital.ai Deploy writes "Besides for the flash GUI which is a pain, it includes all of the features we were looking for". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Makes it easy to build playbooks and saves time and resources". Digital.ai Deploy is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps and Digital.ai Release , whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Microsoft Intune. See our Digital.ai Deploy vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
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.
