OpenText AccuRev vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
OpenText AccuRev
Score 4.3 out of 10
N/A
AccuRev, a software configuration management offering, is now owned and supported by Micro Focus since the December 2013 acquisition, and now by OpenText.N/A
Ansible
Score 8.9 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
OpenText AccuRevRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
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
OpenText AccuRevAnsible
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
OpenText AccuRevRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
OpenText AccuRevRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses
Salt
Salt
Score 7.8 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Salt
Salt
Score 7.8 out of 10
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce Helix Core
Perforce Helix Core
Score 6.3 out of 10
AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText AccuRevRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
1.0
(4 ratings)
9.0
(63 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
6.1
(3 ratings)
8.6
(2 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(1 ratings)
Availability
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(5 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(3 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(1 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText AccuRevRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
OpenText
Very slow and not intuitive; it would be my last choice for version control systems.The UI is a little confusing at times and seems a little outdated. It needs a lot of improvement. It is suited for small projects and fewer number of projects. But if there are huge projects and many projects to be maintained in a portfolio, its a little hard to manage.
Read full review
Red Hat
The thing I mentioned earlier where we're constantly dealing with federal regulations or new agents that they want us to install and deploy and just getting those out in a consistent manner in a canned installation via Playbook is ideal
Read full review
Pros
OpenText
  • One place for most recent code with history, avoid any conflict/confusion among other team/members.
  • Stream/Workflow approach to control approval process betwen all the teams, which I couldn't find in other version control tools I worked.
  • Bundle our code in a small group (called, Issues in Accurev) to differentiate between different projects.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Makes it easy to create and share automation in one central hub.
  • Ansible content collections give me the ability to reuse code, making it rapid to carry out complex IT processes.
  • Event-driven automation allows me to reduce manual tasks: it is rapid to know which action to take and respond automatically by receiving events from external apps automatically.
Read full review
Cons
OpenText
  • Ability to zoom in/out for stream-view. We currently have many streams/substreams and unable to view the entire workflow. Zooming in/out would benefit.
  • Being a designer, I use Adobe Flash and SWF files. When updating the SWF files, Accurev does not see these files as being changed and you will be unable to promote. In order to push changes, you must totally rename the SWF file.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Workflows should have more flexible paths than just success or failure.
  • The upgrade process can be challenging with differences in security and environment.
  • There is an opportunity to add CICD functionality into the tool.
  • For development, it would be nice to have the option of editing a repo directly from AAP to allow quick tests/reruns. Then, allow it to push the updates back or create a new branch/PR in GitHub.
  • The RBAC is good but could use improvements. One example would be an option that allows admins to assume the access of another user to validate it works as expected.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
OpenText
We will renew because it is part of our build process.
Read full review
Red Hat
We are deploying Ansible at all levels of the organization
Read full review
Usability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
the yaml is easy to write and most people can be taught to write basic playbooks in a few weeks
Read full review
Performance
OpenText
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
OpenText
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
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
OpenText
In my view, accurev ranks very low compared to other tools I have used. Microsoft TFS is the best in the industry as of today as it's a complete ALM solution. It does code version, bug tracking, user story documentation, and has easy integration with other external tools supporting many languages. So I would definitely recommend TFS to anyone.
Read full review
Red Hat
AAP doesn't truly stack up against any of the products mentioned except for Aria Automation. But, it is extensible and open and has a lower cost to entry.
Read full review
Return on Investment
OpenText
  • Better team coordination.
  • Avoid confusion by having one place for all documentation and code.
  • Better project management by having different work streams.
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform offers automation and ML tools that allow me to automate complex IT tasks.
  • Through automation analytics, it is seamless to gain full visibility into automation performance allowing me to make informed decisions.
  • Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform allows me to move rapidly from insights to action.
  • Creating and sharing automation content in one place unify a team in one place hence enhancing real-time collaboration.
Read full review
ScreenShots