ActiveBatch Workload Automation vs. IBM DevOps Code ClearCase vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ActiveBatch Workload Automation
Score 7.5 out of 10
N/A
ActiveBatch from Advanced Systems Concepts in New Jersey is IT workload automation software.N/A
IBM DevOps Code ClearCase
Score 9.5 out of 10
N/A
An enterprise-grade configuration management system that provides controlled access to software assets.N/A
Ansible
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
The Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform (acquired by Red Hat in 2015) is a foundation for building and operating automation across an organization. The platform includes tools needed to implement enterprise-wide automation, and can automate resource provisioning, and IT environments and configuration of systems and devices. It can be used in a CI/CD process to provision the target environment and to then deploy the application on it.
$5,000
per year
Pricing
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseAnsible
Free Trial
YesNoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
YesNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Workload Automation
Comparison of Workload Automation features of Product A and Product B
ActiveBatch Workload Automation
9.6
22 Ratings
15% above category average
IBM DevOps Code ClearCase
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
-
Ratings
Multi-platform scheduling9.620 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Central monitoring9.622 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Logging9.621 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Alerts and notifications9.622 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Analysis and visualization9.621 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Application integration9.621 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
ActiveBatch Workload Automation
-
Ratings
IBM DevOps Code ClearCase
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.2
148 Ratings
2% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings00 Ratings8.9142 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings00 Ratings8.2139 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings00 Ratings8.5132 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings00 Ratings8.5124 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings00 Ratings7.4136 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings00 Ratings7.5120 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Salt
Salt
Score 6.2 out of 10
HashiCorp Vagrant
HashiCorp Vagrant
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Apache Airflow
Apache Airflow
Score 8.7 out of 10
Salt
Salt
Score 6.2 out of 10
Automox
Automox
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Control-M
Control-M
Score 9.3 out of 10
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.2 out of 10
Automox
Automox
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
9.6
(23 ratings)
3.3
(2 ratings)
9.3
(171 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
9.8
(5 ratings)
Usability
8.4
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(57 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(5 ratings)
Support Rating
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(5 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
ActiveBatch Workload AutomationIBM DevOps Code ClearCaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
Redwood Software
Any large business or organisation that wants to manage their workload effectively and with the least amount of room for error might choose the ActiveBatch Automation tool. Being a consultant I feel that It aids in task automation and has the flexibility to change in response to varying company requirements. It helps to save huge time by doing all the repetitive tasks on daily basis. During the patching activity the schedulers can be stopped. It also help by alerting us if any system/job is down so that SLA can be saved. Overall ActiveBatch Automation stands as a dependable cornerstone for ensuring the seamless operation of our tasks.
Read full review
IBM
IBM Rational ClearCase might be better suited for a smaller / simpler code base. Larger code bases really slow it down... but then again there are better alternatives out there for source control
Read full review
Red Hat
Red Hat Ansible automates server management, configuration updates, and deployments across our server infrastructure, keeping everything consistent, reducing human error, and saving time. Also provides detailed reports on what is done and uses role-based access controls to keep systems secure by controlling who can make changes.
Read full review
Pros
Redwood Software
  • Businesses can use ActiveBatch to plan tasks based on parameters like frequency, dependencies, and the time of day. By automating typical actions like backups and data transfers, businesses can make sure that crucial operations go off without a hitch.
  • Multiple systems and apps can be used in complicated workflows that ActiveBatch can automate. For instance, it can automate a workflow for processing orders from beginning to end, from the customer order through inventory control and delivery through the processing of invoices and payments.
  • Files can be sent between many platforms and systems safely with ActiveBatch. Transfers to cloud-based storage systems like Amazon S3 and Microsoft Azure are also included in this. SFTP and FTP transfers are also included.
Read full review
IBM
  • Rational ClearCase is excellent for handling versioning and branching. No other tool I've used has the depth that ClearCase has when it comes to handling complex branching scenarios and identifying where certain versions of particular files are within a particular configuration.
  • Rational ClearCase handles parallel development of many dependent applications really well.
  • The use of ClearCase Views to switch between projects and configurations is extremely convenient as opposed to the local workstation model of the competitors.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • It reduces custom scripting efforts because everything can be scripted in simple, human-readable YAML playbooks.
  • Not only servers, but also network devices, VMs, Containers, Kubernetes clusters, etc., can be automated via Ansible, showcasing its extensive list of supported devices.
  • It is agentless, which makes it lightweight and allows for easy integration into CI/CD and GitOps pipelines.
  • Many Tier-1 telcos use Ansible for Day 0/1/2 automation of RAN, transport, and core infrastructure (e.g., network function lifecycle management, NE configuration push, patching VNFs).
Read full review
Cons
Redwood Software
  • On RARE occasions, have seen scheduling properties changed that don't take effect.
  • Simpler to understand/more robust reporting options would be nice to have.
  • Maybe I'm missing something, but why doesn't the Instances view show completion time? Just execution time and duration.
Read full review
IBM
  • Extremely buggy.
  • Sometimes the repository gets locked for no reason.
  • Slow.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • I can't think of any right now because I've heard about the Lightspeed and I'm really excited about that. Ansible has been really solid for us. We haven't had any issues. Maybe the upgrade process, but other than that, as coming from a user, it's awesome.
  • Give out Lightspeed for free.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Redwood Software
No answers on this topic
IBM
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
Even is if it's a great tool, we are looking to renew our licence for our production servers only. The product is very expensive to use, so we might look for a cheaper solution for our non-production servers. One of the solution we are looking, is AWX, free, and similar to AAP. This is be perfect for our non-production servers.
Read full review
Usability
Redwood Software
We can easily add new plans/jobs in our batch schedules. Also, coordination with reporting and QA jobs is simple to do. Building schedules, restarting jobs, triggering dependencies is easy to understand. The system is very stable and allows us to easily see overall processing times.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
It's overall pretty easy to use foe all the applications I've mentioned before: configuring hosts, installing packages through tools like apt, applying yaml, making changes across wide groups of hosts, etc. Its not a 10 because of the inconveinience of the yaml setup, and the time to write is not worth it for something applied one time to only a few hosts
Read full review
Performance
Redwood Software
No answers on this topic
IBM
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
Great in almost every way compared to any other configuration management software. The only thing I wish for is python3 support. Other than that, YAML is much improved compared to the Ruby of Chef. The agentless nature is incredibly convenient for managing systems quickly, and if a member of your term has no terminal experience whatsoever they can still use the UI.
Read full review
Support Rating
Redwood Software
My colleague contacted them directly, I only know hearsay on this but it was not good.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
There is a lot of good documentation that Ansible and Red Hat provide which should help get someone started with making Ansible useful. But once you get to more complicated scenarios, you will benefit from learning from others. I have not used Red Hat support for work with Ansible, but many of the online resources are helpful.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Redwood Software
No answers on this topic
IBM
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Redwood Software
The workload automation solution is based on the specific needs of an organization, as well as the features, capabilities, and costs of various solutions. A thorough evaluation process and consideration of these factors can help ensure the selection of a solution that aligns with overall business objectives and meets the specific needs of the organization.
Read full review
IBM
If development is centrallized to one location and your company releases hundreds of customized versions of your software per year, then ClearCase is the best tool for managing the complexity of multiple versions of customized software. If your company has globally distributed development, then I'd recommend Team Foundation Server over ClearCase. If your organization uses Agile Methodologies, then I'd recommend TFS with GIT.
Read full review
Red Hat
AAP compares favorably with Terraform and Power Automate. I don't have much experience with Terraform, but I find AAP and Ansible easier to use as well as having more capabilities. Power Platform is also an excellent automation tool that is user friendly but I feel that Ansible has more compatibility with a variety of technologies.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Redwood Software
  • I have not run numbers to determine hard impact, but a quick estimate is that at least one job is running for a average of about 6 hours per day - that 6 hours, if done by hand, would equate to about 30 - 40 hours per day (and in some cases, could not be duplicated manually, as the job repeats faster than a person could accomplish one cycle.)
Read full review
IBM
  • Managed code versioning for many years.
  • Only one person can edit code at a time - slows processing down.
  • IBM is an expensive product to support.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • POSITIVE: currently used by the IT department and some others, but we want others to use it.
  • NEGATIVE: We need less technical output for the non-technical. It should be controllable or a setting within playbooks. We also need more graphical responses (non-technical).
  • POSITIVE: Always being updated and expanded (CaC, EDA, Policy as Code, execution environments, AI, etc..)
Read full review
ScreenShots