We use this solution for content view creation for uniform patching of RHEL landscapes over time.
Principal Analyst - AIX and Linux at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Has great technical support, is stable, and scalable
Pros and Cons
- "The most valuable feature is the management of the distributed tool we use in the Red Hat Linux Servers."
- "Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update."
What is our primary use case?
How has it helped my organization?
The solution enables multiple content views for patching various servers.
It manages RHEL systems that do not have direct internet access and provides insight into configuration and vulnerability issues of our RHEL systems.
What needs improvement?
Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update.
I would like better integration with a lighter solution rather than Performance Co-Pilot because PCP is quite heavy. We don't need all the features that PCP provides, as we are doing just fine with Centreon. If Red Hat Satellite were to do the job by itself, that would make us much happier.
The solution is expensive and one most likely needs to budget for it if you have over 100 RHEL systems to manage IMHO.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for the last nine years.
Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Satellite
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about Red Hat Satellite. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
816,562 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We have no problem whatsoever with the actual server. The stability is a ten out of ten. It's more about what we do around, that affects where the licenses are actually implemented, but that's our own pain.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We run about 500 VMs and it hums. We have the ability to scale way beyond. We do have a capsule server for a DMZ, meaning an isolated system environment, on multiple systems, and it works fine. However, if we start slapping on features that could basically be deployed everywhere such as the PCP, we could end up in weird situations, but we don't, because we don't need to. We do it on a point basis if we have a situation we need to put under the microscope. In those cases, we need to be aware that we don't need to micromanage. We just need the solution for microscopic investigation.
I give the scalability a nine out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
The technical support of Red Hat is above and beyond. We have no problems with their support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We received direct updates through RHN.
How was the initial setup?
We set up Red Hat Satellite a while back, but it's been a challenge. The initial setup at that time was not easy. When we have issues, it's often because the licenses have moved off. So we have to be careful and talk through what we're doing. Red Hat Satellite is not like a cloud solution where we can ask it to give us a small VM. The solution requires system administration knowledge and day-to-day care of the overall system, not just Red Hat Satellite, but also the physical servers where we run our VMs.
What about the implementation team?
We implemented the solution in-house with standard electronic RHS support.
What was our ROI?
Red Hat Satellite enables us to freeze our system to a certain point in time and view what patches will be applied. This allows for a more uniform deployment of patches over time. Without Red Hat Satellite, we may be doomed to inconsistent patch deployments. We have seen a return on investment with the solution.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
As for most on-prem systems, the best is to buy 2-socket servers and fill them up with lots of RAM, run a hypervisor, and license RHEL on these as a "Virtual Data Center" - and add the Smart Management for Red Hat Satellite client support.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Open-source Katello and Foreman were discussed but we do not have the time to nurture such delicate creatures.
What other advice do I have?
I give the solution a nine out of ten.
From my experience, RHS/insights are better than tenable.io for authenticated vuln and conformity scanning.
It could require about 1/10 of a man-year to manage RHS as updates are needed twice a year and there may be occasional glitches with licensing that need TLC.
With the newer versions of Satellite, the requirement for puppets goes away altogether, and this can be very elegantly replaced with SSH+sudo.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Customer Delivery Manager at SII
Supports Red Hat products and provides excellent assistance.
What is our primary use case?
We use the solution for patch management, configuration management, and occasional provisioning of new machines. It is an effective tool for managing patches.
What is most valuable?
It offers more support. Whenever you encounter issues, you can open a ticket to Red Hat. With Red Hat, you can access technical support, which is helpful during the initial installation phase. It supports Red Hat products and provides excellent assistance.
What needs improvement?
There are other tools available for monitoring purposes. Additionally, various tools can be utilized for reporting and monitoring the environment. It is not the best tool for monitoring hardware or internet connectivity.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat Satellite for two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The product is stable. I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have a team of seven system managers, with five out of seven actively using Red Hat Satellite.
I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is good. You can open a ticket with Red Hat Support. They are friendly and helpful. They categorize specific issues, such as those related to configuration or patch management, as lower priority, typically at levels two or three.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is complex, but the GUI is easy.
What other advice do I have?
Red Hat Satellite simplifies patch management by allowing you to register your systems once acquired from the Red Hat website. Red Hat Satellite connects you to the Red Hat website, where you can access all reports and review configurations within the Red Hat. This centralized approach enables you to efficiently manage various environments, including VMware, Open Satellite, and physical servers.
Red Hat Satellite is used for real-time monitoring, reporting, and managing system updates and configurations. It offers scalability, allowing for management across various environments.
Red Hat Satellite offers technology support capabilities for IT management. It enhances security by providing numerous advantages for building a secure environment.
Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Last updated: May 16, 2024
Flag as inappropriateBuyer's Guide
Red Hat Satellite
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about Red Hat Satellite. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
816,562 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IT Consultant at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
A robust patch management with high scalability and exceptional support, ensuring stable and secure system operations
Pros and Cons
- "It plays a significant role in managing the lifecycle of our systems and ensures that we can effectively control and update the software versions to align with our organization's needs."
- "Improving integration could lead to a more unified management experience for multiple operating systems within our data center."
What is our primary use case?
It simplifies the management of patches and updates, reduces the risk of security vulnerabilities, and ensures that our RHEL systems remain stable and secure.
What is most valuable?
It plays a significant role in managing the lifecycle of our systems and ensures that we can effectively control and update the software versions to align with our organization's needs. This is particularly valuable for maintaining the stability and compliance of our products and services.
What needs improvement?
We evaluate the possibility of implementing a cache solution to further enhance redundancy and fault tolerance in our systems which could improve the continuity of our systems, especially in the event of incidents or on-site disasters. The challenge I have noticed with standard support subscriptions is that they are often limited to lifecycle patching. Improving integration could lead to a more unified management experience for multiple operating systems within our data center.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with it for approximately six years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's incredibly stable and we haven't experienced any glitches. It runs smoothly, and if any changes or upgrades are necessary, it's a straightforward process.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is highly scalable and I appreciate that and have not encountered any issues with it. Adjusting the tuning, specifically related to licensing and hardware, allows us to easily modify server aspects and upgrade our systems as necessary. I would rate it ten out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
We've had a positive experience with the support team behind the product, which has been consistently helpful. The team's expertise is top-notch, spanning from level two to even level three support. I would rate it seven out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Neutral
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have similar functionalities for user management because we have one system with Red Hat Cloud and another with Azure. Currently, there's some disparity between these systems, and we're exploring the possibility of finding a product that can bridge the gap between them.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup has improved with the new versions, making it more user-friendly and easier for beginners.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate it ten out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Environment Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Comprehensive, secure, and has good functionality
Pros and Cons
- "The most valuable feature of this solution is vulnerability management."
- "It is difficult to update and maintain."
What is our primary use case?
Red Hat Satellite is used to manage the whole server cluster.
Every day, there are several vulnerabilities.
The solution is quite complete, allowing us to monitor the servers and keep them up to date while also addressing the vulnerabilities we have.
It is important to handle zero-day threats as well as your administration's day-to-day operations. It is complete, and we have also begun using a new website. It is a complete tool, that is recommended for compliance, and planning for upgrades.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature of this solution is vulnerability management. This is the main feature for us.
Security is also a primary activity. And just now, system administration. The satellite and Insight, which we have or have a subscription to, are used. In comparison to Windows, where you have to purchase separate items, you need to purchase a system manager.
You should purchase the sender as well as many tools in order to establish a vulnerability management suite with Red Hat. If we had this feature, I'd turn on the light. Thus we can see, for example, how many servers I need to upgrade when zero-day CPEs are discovered. Worksheet.
It is already a tool that adds value to a vital aspect of system administration activities.
What needs improvement?
It is difficult to update and maintain.
In circumstances, where we have complex requests technical support could improve to fix issues more quickly, but for day-to-day concerns, they are good.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Red Hat Satellite for two years.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Because we have Red Had Insight, we have a new perspective, which makes the solution scalable because you can focus on what is critical initially. We just have Red Hat Satellite. We began only with Red Hat Satellite, it's a good tool.
We had a lot of services, which made it difficult to see the critical factors, but with Red Had Insight, we can now see little effects.
Since we have a small tool to scale to work with Red Hat Insight, not only Red Hat Satellite.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is good, they are both helpful and quick.
I would rate the technical support a nine out of ten.
Sometimes we have some complex requests that can take longer time to answer.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate Red Hat Satellite an eight out of ten.
The functionality is very good but it is difficult to update the structure and difficult to maintain it.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Senior Engineering Technologist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Provides compliance auditing and access management but usability and workflows aren't intuitive
Pros and Cons
- "The compliance auditing helped me a lot."
- "They could make it more easy to use and improve the GUI so that it's more intuitive."
What is our primary use case?
We used Red Hat Satellite for deployment, and we wanted to do the initial configuration. We used it for package management and security compliance auditing.
I'm using version 6.7. It was deployed on-premises.
There were five people using this solution on my team. They were all engineers.
We also have Red Hat Linux servers.
What is most valuable?
The compliance auditing helped me a lot. I also used this solution for access management, package management, and contact management.
The features are really good.
What needs improvement?
The usability and workflows aren't intuitive. To get the compliance management working properly, you need to put a lot of effort into it. I spent weeks trying to configure it. There was a lot of trial and error to get things working. It was very difficult. I needed dedicated support from Red Hat to customize it.
They could make it more easy to use and improve the GUI so that it's more intuitive. Right now, it's very difficult to figure out how to get things done from there.
It doesn't integrate very smoothly with other products. They were migrating from Puppet to Ansible. Some features use Puppet, and some features use Ansible.
The documentation could be better. There isn't a lot of information or demos available.
For how long have I used the solution?
I used Red Hat Satellite for five years.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
As far as I know, it's a scalable product, but I didn't use it an affirmative case. I was using a very scaled-down, small deployment.
How was the initial setup?
Setup is difficult. I would rate it as four out of ten.
Deployment took a few months.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The solution is worth the cost.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.
For those who are interested in using this solution, my advice is that it will be a bumpy road. If there's something else that would fit your needs, then my advice is to use that instead.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Principal Architect at Wipro Limited
Complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system, but the interface could be more user friendly
Pros and Cons
- "You don't need to depend on any third party. It's a complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system."
- "I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user."
What is our primary use case?
I use this solution for patch management and configuration management.
It's a hybrid solution.
What is most valuable?
It's really integrated with agencies that have core systems and other core management platform products or IBM products. You don't need to depend on any third party. It's a complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system.
What needs improvement?
The interface could be more user-friendly. For example, if we take a tool like JetPatch, which is a very popular third party tool for attach management and automation, it can be very well integrated with any of the configuration in the management system. It's also user-friendly, and the reporting features are extensive. Red Hat Satellite has very good engineering but is lacking with the user interfaces and reporting.
I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Red Hat Satellite for three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The solution is stable for a Red Hat product.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It's not very scalable. It has issues because you cannot add the incentive easily. You need to have a separate server install configure out of the cluster.
How are customer service and support?
I would rate technical support 7 out of 10.
How was the initial setup?
Setup is complex because you need someone with a good knowledge of troubleshooting to deploy Satellite. You really need an engineering person to do that.You need an integrator or reseller.
You definitely need a skilled person to implement the design quickly. Then you need ongoing support, and you definitely need a better team to manage it. It is a complex case.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The price could be lower and more adaptive.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.
I wouldn't recommend this solution compared to other solutions. We need a complete solution to work on our data center in the public cloud. It can be Linux, Windows, etc. I need a solution which can work across the environment, so I would go with a product other than Satellite.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Owner at Inventrics technologies
Has a straightforward setup process, but its stability needs improvement
Pros and Cons
- "The product is convenient to use."
- "Red Hat Satellite's pricing needs improvement."
What is our primary use case?
We use Red Hat Satellite for patching purposes.
What is most valuable?
The product is convenient to use.
What needs improvement?
Red Hat Satellite's pricing needs improvement.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I rate the product's stability a seven out of ten. It could be improved.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We have less than ten Red Hat Satellite users in our organization. It is a scalable product. I rate its scalability a seven out of ten.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We have used BigFix before. Comparatively, Red Hat works as a proprietary solution. We cannot integrate it with other products. Whereas BigFix can manage integration with various platforms.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is straightforward. We have to download the product and install it in the environment. It requires two engineers to execute the process and takes a month to complete.
What about the implementation team?
We can implement the product in-house.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Our customers have to pay for the product's license.
What other advice do I have?
I rate Red Hat Satellite a five out of ten. I recommend it to users who have basic technical knowledge and skills.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Director at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Good support and suitable for enterprise businesses but a bit expensive
Pros and Cons
- "We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
- "I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The licensing is a bit expensive."
What needs improvement?
The pricing can be improved.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have experience with this solution for about three years.
We have two companies. One of our companies has been a distributor for twenty-three years now.
Another one is a premium partner of Red Hat, specializing in Ansible, OpenShift, and the migration of CentOS.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We work with enterprise businesses, and Red Hat Satellite gets used where needed.
We specialize in Ansible and OpenShift. We also have some AI and ML models. Being a premium partner, we have good access to products.
How are customer service and support?
We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
What about the implementation team?
We've implemented it for customers like Infosys, handling thousands of servers.
What was our ROI?
What happens is when you wanna put the solution, the customer is definitely conscious about the pricing also. So the amount of the job, what it does versus the price, and not many customers want it because they can perhaps simulate this. It's expensive.
For customers, who have a lot number of servers. It is definitely useful.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
For customers with a large number of servers, it is definitely useful.
I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The licensing is a bit expensive.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Red Hat Satellite Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: November 2024
Product Categories
Configuration ManagementPopular Comparisons
Microsoft Intune
Microsoft Configuration Manager
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
VMware Aria Automation
AWS Systems Manager
HashiCorp Terraform
BMC TrueSight Server Automation
SUSE Manager
Puppet Enterprise
AWS CloudFormation
vCenter Configuration Manager
ManageEngine OS Deployer
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Red Hat Satellite Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- What are the pros and cons of Ansible vs Red Hat Satellite?
- What is the difference between Red Hat Satellite and Ansible?
- When evaluating Configuration Management, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- Infrastructure-as-code vs infrastructure configuration
- What is automated configuration management?
- What are the advantages of using Infrastructure as Code (IaC) tools?
- Why is Configuration Management important for companies?