Canonical OpenStack vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Canonical OpenStack
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Canonical OpenStack is the cloud openstack option from Canonical in the UK. Using private and public cloud infrastructure at the same time allows users to optimise CapEx and OpEx costs. Users can create cost-effective, enterprise-grade public cloud infrastructure on Ubuntu.
$7,500
one-time fee
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
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
Private Cloud Build
$75,000
fixed price
Private Cloud Build Plus
$150,000
fixed price
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Canonical OpenStackAnsible
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsAdditional features, functionality, and integrations are available via add-ons
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
Canonical OpenStack
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.1
150 Ratings
1% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings8.9144 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.2141 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.5134 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings8.5126 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.4138 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings7.3122 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

HashiCorp Vagrant
HashiCorp Vagrant
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies

No answers on this topic

Automox
Automox
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises

No answers on this topic

Automox
Automox
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(2 ratings)
9.3
(171 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.9
(5 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(57 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(5 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(5 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
Canonical OpenStackRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
Canonical Ltd
Ubuntu OpenStack is well suited for startups where there are very tight financial constraints. As Ubuntu OpenStack is open source, the startup organizations will not have to spend a lot when compared to their commercial offerings in the market. Ubuntu OpenStack is less appropriate in organizations where they don't want to have private on-prem clouds. As deploying a private on-prem cloud is a very cumbersome and tedious task, the organizations must have a dedicated team to manage such on-prem deployments.
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
Canonical Ltd
  • Very easy to use, learning curve is very short. Don't need to invest months of training before using it
  • Well suited with Jenkins for automated tests
  • Works well on large sets of heterogeneous hardware
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
Canonical Ltd
  • More customizable options while choosing virtual machine configurations would be great.
  • To have regular online learning sessions directly from Ubuntu OpenStack experts [to] help users and for those who implement it.
  • Giving admin more control on what privileges they can grant to their users.
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
Canonical Ltd
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
Canonical Ltd
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
Overall, the product is excellent, with daily-use features for both large and small infrastructure. Ansible does its job quickly and ensures compliance, keeping the environment up to date and safe from open vulnerabilities. Large-scale inventory management and license management. Industry standard followed by best practices to maintain continuity. Budget-friendly compared to other products.
Read full review
Performance
Canonical Ltd
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
Canonical Ltd
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
Canonical Ltd
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Canonical Ltd
Everybody knows VMWare which is the world's number one in data center infrastructure management. OpenStack is lot lot less expensive but doesn't offer all the functionalities you have with VMWare especially for High Availability and load balancing. You should go for OpenStack if you need an easy to use solution without the need for external consultants. If you don't have the capacity to manage your own infrastructure you had better go for VMWare.
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
Canonical Ltd
  • Lighter on initial spending for the organization.
  • Deployments which have no vendor locking makes management decisions easier.
  • Support from great community saved lot of time for engineers managing it.
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