We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure Devops and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Overall, the two solutions are very comparable. They are both easy to deploy and they both have good features.
"The most valuable aspect of Azure DevOps for me is its robust version control functionality, which is critical for our workflow."
"The simplicity and ease of use are two features that we have found to be most valuable."
"Azure DevOps' collaborative features are good, and it integrates well with other tools in the software development process, like quality testing, documentation, and agile development."
"The initial setup is quick and easy."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure DevOps are high-level protection. The protection is very important to the customers to prevent eavesdropping. eavesdropping is when a hacker tries to get into the solution. With this solution is it difficult for them to do it."
"It is a well-integrated product in terms of the development lifecycle."
"Some of the most valuable features are the ease of use and the ability to monitor a lot of things. It has a lot of applications and facilities that meet all the developers' requirements. For example, we can use application insights to get an idea of our application's performance. Since it's cloud-based, it's really good for collaboration and working as a team."
"The extensibility of the work item forms and customizations as well as the backend API to query the data, et cetera, and manipulate the data programmatically are all very valuable aspects of the product."
"The most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"I like being able to control multiple systems and push out updates quickly with just a couple of clicks of a button and commands. I like the automation because it is a time saver."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is quite stable. If you set it up correctly with the right configurations and there are no hiccups during installation and deployment, it will be stable. I'd give stability a rating of eight out of ten."
"It has made our infrastructure more testable. We are able to build our infrastructure in CI, then are more confident in what we are deploying will work, not breaking everything."
"The Organizations feature, where I can give clear silos and hand them over to different teams, that's amazing; everybody says that it's their own Tower. It's like they have their own Tower out there."
"Feature-wise, the solution is a good open-source software offering broad support. Also, it's reliable."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"We can automate a few host configurations using the product."
"There is only one key area of improvement for me. The new imaging thing is that there is DevOps, where security is important because it is always lasting. So, to integrate security in our DevOps, that would be nice."
"Better integration with the Linux operating system would be an improvement for this solution."
"The solution's roadmap and Gantt charts could be improved."
"With an ecosystem that has been up and running for some time, you won't have the full-flexibility that you would have with a new ecosystem."
"I can't think of any specific things at the moment, but I've run into things that I didn't like. I came across something that I wanted to be changed in DevOps, but I can't remember what it was. It was a particular feature I was looking for that I couldn't find."
"I'd like to have something better for the test plan."
"The optimization feature in Microsoft Azure DevOps needs improvement. Control over multiple projects could also be improved."
"The solution could work to improve their reporting."
"There could be more stuff in the workflows. I hope that if I have ten templates with different services on it, workflow could auto-populate all the template-based services."
"For Ansible Tower, there are three tiers with ten nodes. I would like them to expand those ten nodes to 20, because ten nodes is not enough to test on."
"For a couple of the API integrations, there has been a lack of documentation."
"What I'm trying to figure out, personally, is, when doing mass updates, how I can parallelize that a little bit better. It seems right now - and maybe, it's a shortcoming on my end - that I run through one set of servers, and then another set of servers, ad then another set of servers, but it seems like I could throw a lot of these checks out. Different types of servers, like web servers and DB servers, if I could parallelize that a little bit to make everything run a little bit more efficiently, that would help."
"It needs better documentation."
"The solution is slightly expensive, and its pricing could be improved."
"There is always room for improvement in features or customer support."
"There needs to be improvement in the orchestration."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Release Automation with 127 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 60 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Allows us to deploy code to production without releasing certain features immediately and agile project management capabilities offer resource-leveling". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and Asana, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Intune and BMC TrueSight Server Automation. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform report.
See our list of best Release Automation vendors.
We monitor all Release Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.