GNU Make vs TeamCity comparison

GNU and JetBrains are both solutions in the Build Automation category. GNU is ranked #18 with an average rating of 9.0, while JetBrains is ranked #9 with an average rating of 6.8. GNU holds a 0.6% mindshare in BA, compared to JetBrains’s 7.0% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of GNU users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of JetBrains users who would recommend it.

GNU Make

Read 6 GNU Make reviews

207 Views
177 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

TeamCity

Read 28 TeamCity reviews

2,524 Views
2,249 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

GNU Make

TeamCity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between GNU Make and TeamCity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Build Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed GNU Make vs. TeamCity Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

GNU Make vs. TeamCity

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 823,875 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

GNU Make

Ranking in Build Automation

18th

Average Rating

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

TeamCity

Ranking in Build Automation

9th

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of GNU Make is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TeamCity is 7.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Build Automation

Featured Reviews

reviewer2561757

Software at a computer software company with 201-500 employees

Enhances productivity with efficient dependency handling and a straightforward setup

GNU Make is used as a build system tool. Most people don't use GNU Make directly but utilize other systems like CMake to generate Make files, which are then run by GNU Make. This is common for tasks like compiling C++ code. In the industry, AI developers, for example, use GNU Make in their work…

Read full review

Omakoji Idakwoji

Software Engineer at Home Depot

Build management system used to successfully create full request tests and run security scans

I find the TeamCity backend easily accessible. Users can login to the Linux servers that TeamCity is installed on and perform operations. Also I find the ability to template solutions using the meta runner a good feature as well as the user management feature. There is a display that shows which user made recent changes to a branch on GitHub, including the time the changes were made and the particular agent that ran the job. This is also a very useful feature. The metrics and audit available for projects, pipelines and jobs come in handy when debugging.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have not encountered any scalability issues with GNU Make. It is as scalable as the project's structure is, and then some."

"GNU Make is such an essential tool that it is almost impossible to imagine working without it. Not having it, developers would probably have to resort to doing everything manually or via shell scripts."

"Full-featured syntax allows building strategies as simple or as complex as one wishes, and declarative approach fits the task really well. Wide adoption also means that everybody knows what GNU Make is and how to use it."

"Makefiles are extremely easy to work with using any preferred editor. GNU Make can be run directly from the terminal, not requiring any time wasted on clicking."

"The initial setup of GNU Make is straightforward."

"Setup is extremely straightforward."

"It's easy to move to a new release because of templates and meta-runners, and agent pooling."

"VCS Trigger: Provides excellent source control support."

"Good integration with IDE and JetBrains products."

"Time to deployment has been reduced in situations where we want to deploy to production or deploy breaking changes."

"TeamCity is very useful due to the fact that it has a strong plug-in system."

"We would like to see better integration with other version controls, since we encountered difficulty when this we first attempted."

"TeamCity is more structured and user-friendly than other vendors."

"One of the most beneficial features for us is the flexibility it offers in creating deployment steps tailored to different technologies."

More TeamCity pros

Cons

"Vanilla GNU Make does not support any kind of colored output. A wrapper named colormake exists to work around this, but native (opt-in) support would be welcome."

"GNU Make requires using the Tab symbol as the first symbol of command line for execution. In some text editors this can be problematic, as they automatically insert spaces instead of tabs."

"GNU Make does not provide traditional customer support."

"The upgrade process could be smoother. Upgrading major versions can often cause some pain."

"Their online documentation is fairly extensive, but sometimes you can end up navigating in circles to find answers. I would like them (or partner with someone) to provide training classes to help newcomers get things up and running more quickly."

"We've called TeamCity tech support. Unfortunately, all their tech support is based in Europe, so we end up with such a big time crunch that I now need to have one person in the US."

"REST API support lacks many features in customization of builds, jobs, and settings."

"It will benefit this solution if they keep up to date with other CI/CD systems out there."

"The UI for this solution could be improved. New users don't find it easy to navigate. The need some level of training to understand the ins and the outs."

"The integration between other solutions and TeamCity could be smoother."

"If TeamCity could create more out of the box solutions to make it more user friendly and create more use cases, that would be ideal."

More TeamCity cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"GNU Make is free and open source software."

"There is no price for this product. No licensing. It’s open-source."

"Start with the free tier for a few build configs and see how it works for you, then according to your scale find the enterprise license which fits you the most."

"The licensing is on an annual basis."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user184734

Systems Administrator at Facebook

Jan 22, 2015

I generally find TeamCity a lot more intuitive than Jenkins.

Moving to TeamCity from Jenkins At work, we’re slowly migrating from Jenkins to TeamCity in the hope of ending some of our recurring problems with continuous integration. My use of Jenkins prior to this job has been almost strictly on a personal basis, although I pretty much only use Travis…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

27%

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

Real Estate/Law Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GNU Make?

GNU Make is a free solution that comes with Linux, which positively impacts operational costs by eliminating licensing fees.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GNU Make?

I am not familiar enough with it to suggest any specific new features or areas for improvement. It occupies its niche well.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for GNU Make?

See all answers

What do you like most about TeamCity?

One of the most beneficial features for us is the flexibility it offers in creating deployment steps tailored to different technologies.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TeamCity?

Compared to new technologies, TeamCity is more expensive and is an older tool compared to tools like GitLab.

See all answers

What needs improvement with TeamCity?

TeamCity's user interface could be improved; specifically, the tree structure on the homepage is not clear, making it difficult to search for projects. Moreover, there are some limitations related ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jenkins vs GNU Make

Compared 100% of the time

More GNU Make Competitors

GitLab vs TeamCity

Compared 39% of the time

GitHub Actions vs TeamCity

Compared 17% of the time

CircleCI vs TeamCity

Compared 12% of the time

Harness vs TeamCity

Compared 11% of the time

Tekton vs TeamCity

Compared 8% of the time

More TeamCity Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Build Automation

November 2024

Download GNU Make product report

Buyer's Guide

TeamCity

November 2024

Download TeamCity product report

Learn More

GNU

JetBrains

Overview

Make is a tool which controls the generation of executables and other non-source files of a program from the program's source files.

TeamCity is a Continuous Integration and Deployment server that provides out-of-the-box continuous unit testing, code quality analysis, and early reporting on build problems. A simple installation process lets you deploy TeamCity and start improving your release management practices in a matter of minutes. TeamCity supports Java, .NET and Ruby development and integrates perfectly with major IDEs, version control systems, and issue tracking systems.

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Toyota, Xerox, Apple, MIT, Volkswagen, HP, Twitter, Expedia

Buyer's Guide

GNU Make vs. TeamCity

December 2024

Free Report: GNU Make vs. TeamCity

Find out what your peers are saying about GNU Make vs. TeamCity and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

823,875 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GNU Make vs. TeamCity report.

See our list of best Build Automation vendors.

We monitor all Build 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.