We performed a comparison between AWS Amplify and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Release Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of AWS Amplify is authentication."
"Typically, whenever we make changes and need to switch environments (e.g., dev to production), it's easy for our developers to maintain the state of each environment and make customizations as needed. They don't necessarily need to involve the cloud team for basic management."
"The link with Figma is very nice. You can create your design in Figma, and then you can import it into AWS Amplify and use it. You can link it to your data source and data bindings."
"I like Ansible's ease of use. If you have Linux skills, you can create a reusable template for the dependencies and other configurations. I can store the templates in a repository and share them with my customers or other developers. It's a popular solution, so there is a large user base that can share templates."
"One of the most valuable features is automation. We are doing automation infrastructure, which allows us to automate regular tasks. This solution provides us with a service catalog, like building new services and automating daily tasks."
"Role-based access control and agentless architecture are the main features which may attract users."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"Ansible Galaxy is helpful for roles and Git Submodules: No dependency in managing playbooks. Also, fact caching in redis for host/role grp information speeds up execution. Finally, variable management is easy."
"It is very extensible. There are many plugins and modules out there that everybody helps create to interact with different cloud providers as well."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Managing our inventory is a big pain point. Right now, we have Satellite, but we can tie it in with Satellite, so we can actually manage things and automate the entire deployment stack, instead of trying to grab things from tickets, then generating Kickstart, and using that to get things in Satellite. That doesn't work well. We can do the whole deployment stack using the inventory share between Tower and Satellite."
"AWS can implement multiple web applications, and cross-platform applications, like iOS."
"Its capability to handle big projects needs to be improved. If you generate a user interface in Figma and import everything where all components are in one directory, currently, it is complicated. It isn't able to cope with that. For small projects, it is not an issue, but if you have big projects and you want to use AWS Amplify, then it gets more difficult. That is the most important point for me. It should be improved to cope better with bigger projects."
"AWS Amplify could improve in the deployment. It would be beneficial to have more methods, such as automation."
"The governance features could be improved."
"There needs to be improvement in the orchestration."
"The job workflow needs to be worked on. It's not really clear to how you actually link things together. What they probably could do is provide an example workflow on how to stitch things together. I think that would be very helpful."
"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."
"Some of the modules in Ansible could be a bit more mature. There is still a little room for further development. Some performance aspects could be improved, perhaps in the form of parallelism within Ansible."
"What I would like to see is a refined Dashboard to see, when I log in: Here are all my jobs, here are how many times they've executed; some kind graphical stitching-together of the workflows and jobs, and how they're connected. Also, those "failed hosts," what does that mean? We have a problem, a failed host can be anything. Is SSH the reason it failed? Is the job template why it failed? It doesn't really distinguish that."
"If we have a problem with some file and we need to get Red Hat to analyze the issue and the file is 100GBs, we'll have an issue since we need to provide a log file for them to analyze. If it is around 12GB or 13GB, we can easily upload it to the Red Hat portal. With more than 100GBs, it will fail. I heard it should cover up to 250GB for an upload, however, I find it fails. Therefore, Red Hat needs to provide a way to handle this."
"It can use some more credential types. I've found that when I go looking for a certain credential type, such as private keys, they're not really there."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Amplify is ranked 5th in Release Automation with 3 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 58 reviews. AWS Amplify is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS Amplify writes "Amplify CLI acts as a single source of truth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". AWS Amplify is most compared with AWS CodeDeploy, Microsoft Azure DevOps, AWS CodeStar, Ozone and GitLab, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Microsoft Intune. See our AWS Amplify 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.
