Azure Pipelines vs. HashiCorp Packer

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure Pipelines
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
Users can automate builds and deployments with Azure Pipelines. Build, test, and deploy Node.js, Python, Java, PHP, Ruby, C/C++, .NET, Android, and iOS apps. Run in parallel on Linux, macOS, and Windows. Azure Pipelines can be purchased standalone, but it is also part of Azure DevOps Services agile development planning and CI/CD suite.N/A
HashiCorp Packer
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
HashiCorp Packer automates the creation of machine images, coming out of the box with support to build images for Amazon EC2, CloudStack, DigitalOcean, Docker, Google Compute Engine, Microsoft Azure, QEMU, VirtualBox, and VMware.N/A
Pricing
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Considered Both Products
Azure Pipelines
Chose Azure Pipelines
We have used the GitHub CI/CD. Earlier we were using the Azure Pipelines but after GitHub had their actions, we integrated that for CI/CD. It runs the tests and makes a production build which can be live. GitHub CI/CD is more useful because we have to make script only once then …
Chose Azure Pipelines
The tools are very similar - but Azure Pipelines work best for Azure-based products are better suited for the stack. For our engineers, we could switch between all the various continuous integration/deployment tools without much issues, but it makes sense to use the stack …
HashiCorp Packer
Chose HashiCorp Packer
There are lot of tools in market which does the job for Image creation but all of them are not complete Machine/Image as a code. All other alternatives can create Image partially.

Main reason for selecting Packer are
Best Alternatives
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure PipelinesHashiCorp Packer
Likelihood to Recommend
With a fully Microsoft Azure based workflow - Azure Pipelines makes absolute sense. Azure Pipelines are robust and work very well with SonarQube for test coverage and are shared with our developers. This prevents the developers for pushing code without unit tests across our backend and frontend platforms. We have reduced our instances of manual regression tests especially when there are multiple teams working across the same repositories.
Read full review
We use packer to generate new machine images for multiple platforms on every change to our Configuration Management tools like Chef/Puppet/Ansible It's act single tool for Image building for Multi-provider like AWS/Azure/GCP Helps to achieve Dev/Prod Parity Packer itself doesn't have a state like Terraform. You can't do packer output AMI ID. If you have a scenario where you want to maintain the state for images it would be tough to manage via Packer.
Read full review
Pros
  • Code Integration/Code Deployment
  • Azure Engine Auto Scaling Up with help of Pipeline
  • Managing Version Control and deploy in rollback with just one click
Read full review
  • Multi-provider portability
  • Greater testability
  • Super fast infrastructure deployment
Read full review
Cons
  • Error messaging when team members don't have permissions
Read full review
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
We are happy with the use of Packer in our organization. Apart from manageability, I don't find any other drawback with Packer.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
It's best for building Image with many features and benefits.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
I only once required support and it was very smooth.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I haven't found any issue in Implementation that itself describes how well this tool is built.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
We have used the GitHub CI/CD. Earlier we were using the Azure Pipelines but after GitHub had their actions, we integrated that for CI/CD. It runs the tests and makes a production build which can be live. GitHub CI/CD is more useful because we have to make script only once then just by few changes we can deploy it onto Azure, AWS, Google anywhere so we found it more convenient
Read full review
There are lot of tools in market which does the job for Image creation but all of them are not complete Machine/Image as a code. All other alternatives can create Image partially. Main reason for selecting Packer are Packer is lightweight, portable, and command-line driven Packer helps keep development, staging, and production as similar as possible. Packer automates the creation of any type of machine image Multi-provider portability is the feature to die for
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • We don't have to deploy changes manually
  • But because of this that we automated some tasks, we need to be still aware of some edge cases we can meet and which can cause a pipelines failures
  • We can deploy changes pretty fast
Read full review
  • Super fast infrastructure deployment
  • Quick turnaround of infrastructure in multiple cloud using single tool.
  • Increase productivity by reducing time in infrastructure building.
Read full review
ScreenShots