IBM DevOps Deploy vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
IBM DevOps Deploy
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
A solution for continuous delivery of any application to any environment, and an application-release solution that infuses automation into the continuous delivery and continuous deployment (CI/CD) process and provides robust visibility, traceability and auditing capabilities.N/A
Ansible
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
The Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform (acquired by Red Hat in 2015) is a foundation for building and operating automation across an organization. The platform includes tools needed to implement enterprise-wide automation, and can automate resource provisioning, and IT environments and configuration of systems and devices. It can be used in a CI/CD process to provision the target environment and to then deploy the application on it.
$5,000
per year
Pricing
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM DevOps DeployAnsible
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Considered Both Products
IBM DevOps Deploy

No answer on this topic

Ansible
Chose Ansible
Puppet has Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform beat on metrics. This isn't a fair comparison due to the agent oriented nature of puppet. Ansible is much smoother to start using and appreciably faster to install, configure and role into small groups of systems. I no longer use …
Chose Ansible
more geared towards infrastructure automation, more in depth Ansible workflows
Chose Ansible
Solar Winds orian has a lot of features but its only geared toward automation like Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform.
Chose Ansible
Chef Enterprise Automation Stack and Puppet Enterprise
Chose Ansible
Answer for bove:
IBM Integrated Web Services:
Clunky. Slow UI. Hard to find and track jobs.
Chose Ansible
AAP compares favorably with Terraform and Power Automate. I don't have much experience with Terraform, but I find AAP and Ansible easier to use as well as having more capabilities. Power Platform is also an excellent automation tool that is user friendly but I feel that …
Chose Ansible
Ansible is agentless and using SSH so sometimes when the SSH is down we are using since Tanium it is agent base app we using Tanium l to get to the serverand before we were using SALT
Chose Ansible
I think terraform has some overlap with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and what determines which tool would be best will depend on how much can be pushed to the far left vs needing to be flexible or dynamic post deployment
Features
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
IBM DevOps Deploy
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.6
Ratings
7% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings9.20 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.80 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Best Alternatives
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
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
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
AWS Config
AWS Config
Score 7.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
9.5
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
IBM DevOps DeployRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
IBM UrbanCode Deploy is excellent for code deployments such as Java, .Net, C++, etc. It can also deploy and run SQLs reasonably well. Where it lacks is the ability for executables, Jars, WARs, EARs, etc.
Read full review
I'm going to say it is best suited for configuration management. Like I said, patching even with security, things of that nature. Probably less suited is hardware management, but Red Hat IBM/IBM has Terraform for that. So it's a trade off.
Read full review
Pros
  • Consistently deploys to multiple environments with no changes to the process. Having reusable processes across environments from Dev to Production make deployments more consistent and easier to manage.
  • IBM UrbanCode Deploy has an easy to understand UI, to be able to review if a deployment has successfully completed or not, and details if it did not work. Using the UI is simple and easy to understand.
  • Scheduling and approvals are built-in as configured for the deployments. This allows us to use the same deployment process, but get approvals as needed when code is moved up to the upper environments.
Read full review
  • Debugging is easy, as it tells you exactly within your job where the job failed, even when jumping around several playbooks.
  • Ansible seems to integrate with everything, and the community is big enough that if you are unsure how to approach converting a process into a playbook, you can usually find something similar to what you are trying to do.
  • Security in AAP seems to be pretty straightforward. Easy to organize and identify who has what permissions or can only see the content based on the organization they belong to.
Read full review
Cons
  • Use of the internal API for public API use.
  • Less cryptic CLI output on commands.
  • Better use of custom variables that don't interfere with UCD's use.
Read full review
  • Ability to tell when a task has already been done
  • yaml configuration can be annoying at times, perhaps a built in lint so yq isn't needed
  • the become feature should be able to be set to true globally without using args
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
Even is if it's a great tool, we are looking to renew our licence for our production servers only. The product is very expensive to use, so we might look for a cheaper solution for our non-production servers. One of the solution we are looking, is AWX, free, and similar to AAP. This is be perfect for our non-production servers.
Read full review
Usability
It's challenging to get a working knowledge of the product without having someone show you the ropes. Linking components with applications and applications with resource trees and resource trees with application deploys is not intuitive. However, once past that learning curve, the possibilities open up, and things become easier to understand and allow for further granularity.
Read full review
Overall it's good but the new architecture can be complex. Improvements can be made in the Config as Code capabilities for managing Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. Sometimes it can be difficult for those unfamiliar to understand the relationship between Projects/Credentials/Job Templates, etc.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Great in almost every way compared to any other configuration management software. The only thing I wish for is python3 support. Other than that, YAML is much improved compared to the Ruby of Chef. The agentless nature is incredibly convenient for managing systems quickly, and if a member of your term has no terminal experience whatsoever they can still use the UI.
Read full review
Support Rating
I've not worked directly with IBM UrbanCode Deploy support. My DevOps team administers the environment and deals with that.
Read full review
There is a lot of good documentation that Ansible and Red Hat provide which should help get someone started with making Ansible useful. But once you get to more complicated scenarios, you will benefit from learning from others. I have not used Red Hat support for work with Ansible, but many of the online resources are helpful.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
No answers on this topic
As I said earlier, Red Hat Ansible remains a top choice because it is a perfect combination of multiple capabilities. Terraform is good in IAC but not in config automation. Puppet is well-suited for developers, but not for system administrators and infrastructure integrators. OpenShift and Kubernetes are generic automators only.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Push button deployments.
  • Consistency and ability to focus on other tasks.
  • Required quite a bit of upfront customization with certain web deployments (WebSphere, etc.)
  • Opened the door to other types of deployments and other automation.
Read full review
  • We are still early in our implementation and don't have much yet - but I can say that it has already improved the time it takes to deploy a new virtual server for us, as well as making them more consistent.
  • In working through what jobs are required, it has really improved the communication between our different teams
Read full review
ScreenShots