We performed a comparison between OpenText Operations Orchestration and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"It increases our company's efficiency, automating all the simple tasks which used to take hours of somebody's time."
"The most valuable features of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform are the agentless platform and writing the code is simple using the Yaml computer language."
"The reason I like Ansible is, first, the coding of it is very straightforward, it's very human-readable. I'm also on a contract, and I can clearly iterate and bring people up to speed very quickly on writing a Playbook compared with writing up a Puppet manifest or a Salt script."
"There are new modules available, which help to simplify the workflow. That is what we like about it."
"It does not require staff for deployment and maintenance. It just works."
"I like the agentless feature. This means we don't install any agent in worker nodes."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its configuration management, drift management, workflow templates with the visual UI, and graphical workflow representation."
"The solution is capable of integrating with many applications and devices in comparison to BigFix."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"The area which I feel can be improved is the custom modules. For example, there are something like 106 official modules available in the Ansible library. A year ago, that number was somewhere around 58. While Ansible is improving day by day, this can be improved more. For instance, when you need to configure in the cloud, you need to write up a module for that."
"From Red Hat Insights point of view, the product is not on top as it is not responding as per the demand...Like on cloud platforms, you can see the main parts of Red Hat Insights, along with the inventory of all your apps. So, that is missing in Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform."
"When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."
"Because Ansible is establishing SSH sessions to perform tasks, there is a limit on scalability."
"The solution should add a nice self-service portal."
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"The governance features could be improved."
"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."
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 19th in Process Automation with 24 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews. OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". 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". OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Control-M, Camunda, Microsoft System Center Orchestrator, BigFix and Appian, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps.
We monitor all Process 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.