We performed a comparison between Nolio Release Automation 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."One standout aspect is its architecture. We can configure multiple instances on a single server using different system names or usernames."
"The graphical view of when you're writing flow is the most valuable feature."
"The CA Application Insight feature is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The biggest thing I liked about Ansible is the check mode so that we can verify, after we've pushed, that the config there is actually what we intended."
"Ansible Tower provides a GUI, which is an enhancement, and a well-liked feature by operation teams."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Ansible is repeatability because when you're working at the DoD, you want things to be cookie-cutter and replicable."
"The most useful features are the playbooks. We can develop our playbooks and simplify them doing something like a cross platform."
"I like the fact that Ansible is agentless."
"Feature-wise, the solution is a good open-source software offering broad support. Also, it's reliable."
"The configuration of the solution is a bit difficult to maneuver. They should work to make it easier."
"It could use better integration with development tools."
"In the next release, I would like to see more features to use active directory. And more rules to support more Python scripts and to work with Kubernetes and clouds, to have an easy solution for a lot of parameters."
"A concern with CA Release Automation is that Automic was acquired by CA recently. We're a bit concerned that CA strategy is going with Automic, that CA Release Automation is dead. They are not investing in it too much... They do say, that in the next two or three years we don't need to worry. They will still provide support for CA Release Automation. But we're not sure how CA Release Automation will evolve."
"When I started using Nolio around eight months ago, a challenge was the lack of relevant information and related support for learning."
"Performance has been an issue on larger environments, but it has gotten a lot better over the past two years."
"It could be easier to integrate Ansible with other solutions. No single tool can do everything. For example, we use Terraform for infrastructure and other solutions for configuration management and VMs."
"In Community, there's a lot of effort towards testing, standardizing, and testing for module development to role development, which is why Molecule is now becoming real. Same thing with Zuul, which we are starting to implement. Zulu tests out modules from third-party sources, like ourselves, and verifies that the modules work before they are committed to the code. Currently, Ansible can't do this with all the modules out there."
"Some of the Cisco modules could be expanded, which would be great, along with not having to do so much coding in the background to make it work."
"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."
"The scalability of the solution has some shortcomings."
"At this time, I do not have anything to improve. What we struggle with is the knowledge base, but that is more about us having to go and find it and learn the platform on our own rather than an actual Ansible issue."
"The solution must be made easier to configure."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nolio Release Automation is ranked 12th in Release Automation with 50 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 3rd in Release Automation with 62 reviews. Nolio Release Automation is rated 7.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Nolio Release Automation writes " Enables one-touch application deployment across various environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Makes it easy to build playbooks and saves time and resources". Nolio Release Automation is most compared with GitLab, Chef, Microsoft Azure DevOps and UrbanCode Deploy, 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 Nolio Release Automation 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.
