HashiCorp Packer vs. Perforce Puppet

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Perforce Puppet
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Puppet Enteprise is an IT automation and configuration management solution that enables users to manage and automate infrastructure and complex workflows. The vendor states Puppet Enterprise combines both model‑based and task-based capabilities in a way that enables organizations to scale their multi-cloud infrastructure as their automation footprint grows, with more flexibility from both agent-based and agentless capabilities.N/A
Pricing
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Considered Both Products
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
Perforce Puppet
Chose Perforce Puppet
As I mentioned before Ansible is a great tool. There is no question about it. It has very simple syntax (YAML), is very easy to learn, and is scalable as well. But the only thing that ansible lacked at that time was the actual agent that have to go into each server. Ansible …
Chose Perforce Puppet
[Both] products are comparable. There is a good open source community for each, but we found Puppet to be the most mature for our specific use case.
Chose Perforce Puppet
Puppet was selected before I joined the team, had it been my choice I would have much rather went with Chef as it has the ability to do things that Puppet has not yet added to their system such a the ability to quickly query what host currently are allowing puppet to maintain …
Chose Perforce Puppet
I have not used any other Configuration Management System since cfengine back in about 2007 so I have little current input on alternatives to Puppet having never used them, though Chef seems to have gained some traction as has Ansible.
Chose Perforce Puppet
We have used SaltStack by proxy of utilizing Ceph since it uses SaltStack to automate configuration changes to it's cluster. I found it easy to use however extremely limiting when it comes to scale as its not a proper language with a central data store like Hiera. We plan to …
Chose Perforce Puppet
Puppet was the first software for data center automation that we incorporated in our infrastructure and we were pleased enough to keep going with it.
Chose Perforce Puppet
HPSA is a licensed product and incurs significant upfront investment costs due to COTS licensing. Puppet Data Center Automation has a significantly lower upfront investment and product documentation is more readily available. Chef is a very similar offering, however, at the …
Chose Perforce Puppet
Puppet has a very wide user base with many organizations tht support it as well as conferences and events. Puppet DSL is based in Ruby while the server is now in Clojure providing ease of configuration with the power of scale. Puppet is a great entry point into the world of …
Chose Perforce Puppet
I was put on a team that initially adopted Puppet. However from what I see, it fits and makes sense.
Chose Perforce Puppet
We evaluated Chef and Ansible. Puppet Data Center Automation was cleaner and we were more familiar with the product.
Best Alternatives
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Ansible
Ansible
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Ansible
Ansible
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
HashiCorp PackerPerforce Puppet
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Most of the major issues that people had with the language have been addressed in Puppet 4 which primarily pertain to the limitations of the language and its ability to scale. It would be nice to allow for full ruby support as an unsupported option though so developers are able to reference their own data sources dynamically.
Read full review
Pros
  • Multi-provider portability
  • Greater testability
  • Super fast infrastructure deployment
Read full review
  • Provides a reliable mechanism for deploying infrastructure-as-code, especially when integrated with source control (such as Git).
  • Manages system configuration drift to provide greater stability and system up-time; the same configuration-as-code can be pushed out over and over.
  • A strong asset when moving teams towards DevOps by providing development a way to take control of their own assets.
Read full review
Cons
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
Read full review
  • Steep learning curve for first time users.
  • The complexity can get a little overwhelming in a more collaborative deployment methodology across multiple platforms and data centers.
  • Some external changes to Puppet like the new Puppet 4 architecture can cause considerable time consuming migration efforts especially if you have a lot of legacy classes and configuration that do not conform readily to the new design.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
No answers on this topic
Usability
It's best for building Image with many features and benefits.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
I only once required support and it was very smooth.
Read full review
Puppet has top class support. You can simply mail them with their query and they will respond to your query in a timely manner. We do have enterprise license for puppet. Also there is a vibrant community for puppet out there. So even if you dont purchase a premium support option you can simply google your queries and get answers
Read full review
Implementation Rating
I haven't found any issue in Implementation that itself describes how well this tool is built.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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
Puppet was selected before I joined the team, had it been my choice I would have much rather went with Chef as it has the ability to do things that Puppet has not yet added to their system such a the ability to quickly query what host currently are allowing puppet to maintain their files or the ability to run remote commands without having to include it in a manifest like Chef does with the knife command. Salt allows you to do similar things to the knife command that is included with Chef, and also allows you to transfer files quickly to multiple host at once with a short simple command.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • 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
  • With all the DevOps and automation that we have going on, we save a ton of time on the configuration of the server. It's safe to say that configuring servers via console or via UI is a thing of the past.
  • We try to get all the things done by using a centralized repo (GitHub). Puppet is one tool that actually gets the actual work done.
  • The small amount that we spent on purchasing premium Puppet is completely justified because of the time and effort that this tool actually helps us save.
Read full review
ScreenShots