Progress Chef vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Progress Chef

49 Reviews and Ratings

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

339 Reviews and Ratings

Overview
Product	Rating	Most Used By	Product Summary	Starting Price
Progress Chef	Score6.5 out of 10	N/A	Chef IT infrastructure automation suites were developed by Chef Software in Seattle and acquired by Progress Software in September 2020. The Chef Enterprise Automation Stack is an integrated suite of automation technologies presented as a solution for delivering change quickly, repeatedly, and securely over every application's lifecycle. The Chef Effortless Infrastructure Suit is an integrated suite of automation technologies to codify infrastructure, security, and compliance, as well as…	N/A
Ansible	Score9.2 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

Progress Chef

Ansible

No answers on this topic

Basic Tower: 5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower: 10,000
per year
Premium Tower: 14,000
per year

Pricing Offerings
Progress Chef	Ansible
Free Trial
No	No
Free/Freemium Version
No	No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No	No

No setup fee

No setup fee

—

—

Community Pulse
Key User Insights
	Progress Chef	Ansible
Considered Both Products	Progress Software Verified User Chose Progress Chef Chef is the more developer-oriented of the three main tools in this space. It has a steeper learning curve as a result but it allows you to do more. Puppet seems to be more geared towards automated the management of the operating system. Ansible is an excellent tool but … Incentivized Helpful? Rob Ericsson Senior Vice President Of Product Development in Product Management at Rizing (Information Technology & Services, 501-1000 employees) Chose Progress Chef We considered the three leading competitors in the field: Chef, Puppet and Ansible. Ansible is a very strong competitor and has a nice degree of flexibility in that it does not require a client install. Instead the configuration is delivered by SSH which is very simple. Puppet … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Progress Chef Puppet Labs and CFEngine are also open source and competes with Chef. Chef has more support from the community with templates available for large scale IT deployments. RedHat Ansible is better suited when you are already using RedHat OS and OpenShift since it comes as it comes … Incentivized Helpful? Gene Baker Vice President, Chief Architect, Development Manager and Software Engineer in Information Technology at WySTAR Global Retirement Solutions, a Wells Fargo Company (Financial Services, 10,001+ employees) Chose Progress Chef We found that Chef was easy to use, and we liked the whole concept of recipes and cookbooks. We were using the concept of recipes and cookbooks for our SQL development, so Chef was a natural fit for our team members and environment. That whole paradigm is easy for everyone … Incentivized Helpful? Christopher Maggiulli Enterprise Software Architect in Research & Development at Latham Pool Products Inc (Building Materials, 1001-5000 employees) Chose Progress Chef I've mostly explained the differences between Ansible and Chef in my previous answers. I generally prefer Chef over Ansible because the platforms we use have very convenient cookbooks. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Progress Chef Chef is easy to install and manage, and the learning curve is minimal, as most of the engineers are already aware of the syntax to configure services. With flexible crating recipes and cookbooks, Chef made our jobs easier, and also it integrates well with Puppet. Overall … Incentivized Helpful? Dylan Cauwels DevOps Engineer in Engineering at CBRE (Real Estate, 10,001+ employees) Chose Progress Chef Chef is something we have been using for a while, so it is the natural choice when training new engineers to maintain our systems. If I was to choose a configuration management tool now, I would pick Ansible mainly because of its agentless nature and YAML cookbook language … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Progress Chef We believe Chef is a great tool for DevOp. It works really well with repository tools such as Bitbucket and artifactory. The other products we evaluated either were too pricey or did not have the support we needed for a company that was very vanilla with automation. We selected … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Progress Chef We were evaluating Ansible as it was agent less, SSH based, simple to use and is completely based on SSH protocol. As and when the servers count increase the performance might degrade. One main disadvantage with Ansible is it is more suitable for linux based systems where SSH … Incentivized Helpful? Aiman Najjar DevOps Principal Architect in Information Technology at Pythian (Computer Software, 501-1000 employees) Chose Progress Chef I really found that Chef to be much friendlier and innovative than Puppet. There is an opinion in the DevOps community that says that Chef is friendlier to programmers whereas Puppet is friendlier to system administrators. This might be true, as I do come from development … Incentivized Helpful? Ofir Gutmacher DevOps Manager at Bezeq International (Computer Software, 10,001+ employees) Chose Progress Chef Chef is good for organizations with many servers, because of the client-server approach. I guess Ansible can be used for some 20-40 servers, just ssh and run the playbook. Chef is in ruby which is a really simple to learn language as opposed to competitiors. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Progress Chef Ansible and salt stack seem to be the new cool kids on the block because they are easier to setup and manage across smaller teams. I think the use of puppet is dying down in favor for these new technologies. I would like to see chef use cases with simpler implementation. Incentivized Helpful?	Red Hat Verified User Chose Ansible It provides better RBAC and security also it is written in python and uses yaml which is a lower barrier of entry for new admins without a lot of programming experience. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Ansible It was much simpler to deploy and use Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform in our enterprise environment. Red Hat has great training to get our users up to speed. YAML is easy to write (although watch out for spacing) and run playbooks. We can easily generate infrastructure … Incentivized Helpful? Dylan Cauwels DevOps Engineer in Engineering at CBRE (Real Estate, 10,001+ employees) Chose Ansible Chef is something that was used previously by our head engineer and is quite similar to Ansible. They're both great configuration management tools. However, since Ansible is agent-less, we decided to switch for the convenience and quick-start nature of Ansible. Along with that … Incentivized Helpful? Aiman Najjar DevOps Consultant in Information Technology at Pythian (Computer Software, 51-200 employees) Chose Ansible Ansible is much simpler to get up and running with than Chef, as it requires no infrastructure or agent process or any configuration on the target machine. All you need is SSH access! However, you lose the capabilities that Chef server offers such as data bags (centralized data … Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Ansible I have used Puppet, Chef during my career and Ansible seems to be the most efficient tool by far, in terms of its implementation, configuration and ease of use. Incentivized Helpful? Verified User Chose Ansible All three of these competitors are agent based. I did not want an additional service that needed to run absolutely everywhere. I also did not want to maintain a load balanced cluster of master servers that grows in resource requirements as your infrastructure scales. Incentivized Helpful?
	Would buy again
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Delivers good value for the price
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Happy with the feature set
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Lived up to sales and marketing promises
	No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic
	Implementation went as expected
No answers on this topic	No answers on this topic

Features

Progress Chef

Ansible

Comparison of Configuration Management features of Progress Chef and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Feature	Progress Chef - Ratings	Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 8.6 44 Ratings
Infrastructure Automation	00 Ratings	9.244 Ratings
Automated Provisioning	00 Ratings	8.841 Ratings
Parallel Execution	00 Ratings	8.840 Ratings
Node Management	00 Ratings	8.432 Ratings
Reporting & Logging	00 Ratings	7.841 Ratings
Version Control	00 Ratings	8.738 Ratings

User Ratings
	Progress Chef	Ansible
Likelihood to Recommend	8.9 (18 ratings)	9.5 (108 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew	- (0 ratings)	8.0 (3 ratings)
Usability	7.3 (1 ratings)	7.3 (1 ratings)
Performance	9.4 (5 ratings)	8.7 (5 ratings)
Support Rating	7.7 (3 ratings)	7.3 (3 ratings)
Implementation Rating	- (0 ratings)	8.2 (1 ratings)
Contract Terms and Pricing Model	6.4 (1 ratings)	- (0 ratings)
Ease of integration	9.6 (5 ratings)	8.6 (5 ratings)
Professional Services	9.1 (1 ratings)	- (0 ratings)