We performed a comparison between Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Red Hat Satellite based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Ansible has a slight edge over Satellite in this comparison since it is a free solution and easier to deploy than Satellite.
"Application deployment and keeping the devices secure no matter where they are, by having this cloud solution — that has been great."
"For Windows services, there are multiple options within Intune to modernize it to be more internet-facing and dynamic."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"The most valuable feature is the policy CSPs."
"The feature I like the most is that we can perform remote tasks. If we want to retire or wipe out personal data or corporate data from a device, we can use Microsoft Intune remotely, and with the click of a button, data is removed automatically. Nothing needs to be done from the end-user side."
"I like the fact that it's integrated with the rest of the Microsoft products, so customers can manage it from their Office 365 portal or Azure portal."
"The stability of Microsoft Intune is good."
"It supports end-users who tend to lock their devices quite frequently. Its conditional access policy helps us keep the users logged into their devices."
"We can automate a few host configurations using the product."
"Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server."
"The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching."
"There are no agents by default, so adding a new server is a matter of a couple lines of configuration (on a new server and the configuration master)."
"Since it is in YAML, if I have to explain it to somebody else, they can easily understand it."
"The initial setup is easy and takes a few hours to complete."
"I like the agentless feature. This means we don't install any agent in worker nodes."
"Role-based access control and agentless architecture are the main features which may attract users."
"Patch management is, for sure, most valuable. For license management and patch management, I would rate it a 10 out of 10."
"The most valuable feature is the fact that you don't have to expose your mission-critical environment to the Internet. With the Satellite system in place, it acts as a barrier between your Red Hat infrastructure and the public Internet."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is vulnerability management."
"The 'remote execution' feature further helps manage systems on a consistent basis."
"The product helps me to manage a large number of servers from one console."
"The product allows us to handle patching for multiple servers at a time manually."
"You don't need to depend on any third party. It's a complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system."
"When somebody has a customized application or their own company's application, we cannot deploy that application."
"There are items that require improvements. One is the controls from iOS."
"No option to do end-to-en macOS management. Slow implementation of policies."
"What would make this product better is adding more security policies and features in the next upgrade."
"It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation."
"Some enrollment features could be improved."
"It needs certificate provisioning for S/MIME purposes."
"From a new user's perspective, it may be a little overwhelming because there are quite a few things to look at in the console, however, once you are sort of acclimated and are familiar with your core functions, it's fairly simple and straightforward."
"Accessibility. Ansible uses a CLI by default. Those accustomed to it can find their way and adopt the YAML files easily over time. But, some users are more comfortable using UIs..."
"The user interface on the Ansible Tower product could be better, but it is functional."
"They should think of this product as an end-to-end solution and begin to develop it that way."
"It needs better documentation."
"The governance features could be improved."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
"On the Dashboard, when you view a template run, it shows all the output. There is a search filter, but it would be nice to able to select one server in that run and then see all that output from just that one server, instead of having to do the search on that one server and find the results."
"We would like support for the post-integration of this product before cloud frameworks because right now their approach is to avoid using on-premises activities and move everything to the cloud."
"The dashboard of Satellite is not encouraging. It does not adequately showcase all the functionality it offers."
"Improving integration could lead to a more unified management experience for multiple operating systems within our data center."
"Regarding the product's ability to support third-party tools, Red Hat doesn't support all the layers from the open-source version of Linux."
"I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user."
"There needs to be some margin for improvement in terms of the way Satellite manages subscriptions. It is still very confusing when we have different contracts or different bundles of subscriptions, and we need to manage those within Satellite in a way that's very user-friendly."
"Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update."
"Red Hat Satellite's pricing needs improvement."
"The product's automation capabilities need enhancement."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 58 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 21 reviews. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Capable of broad integrations with easy-to-operate infrastructure and user controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps, BMC TrueSight Server Automation and BigFix, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with SUSE Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Chef. See our Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. Red Hat Satellite report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management 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.