PDQ Deploy & Inventory vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
PDQ Deploy & Inventory
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
PDQ.com headquartered in Salt Lake City offers PDQ Deploy, a software deployment tool used to keep Windows PCs up-to-date without bothering end users.
$1,575
per year per user
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
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed 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
PDQ Deploy & InventoryAnsible
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsPDQ was built by entrepreneurs & educators. Small businesses (<50 employees), nonprofits, and schools enjoy a 15% discount.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
PDQ Deploy & Inventory
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.3
145 Ratings
3% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings9.0139 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.5136 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.5129 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings8.5121 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.4133 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings8.0117 Ratings
Best Alternatives
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses
Action1
Action1
Score 9.4 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Action1
Action1
Score 9.4 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.6 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
9.7
(12 ratings)
9.3
(214 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(2 ratings)
9.6
(5 ratings)
Usability
9.5
(6 ratings)
8.3
(106 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(5 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(5 ratings)
8.0
(5 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(2 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
PDQ Deploy & InventoryRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
PDQ
PDQ Inventory is great if you have a local network of computers on or off a domain. As long as you have a way to log into them with common credentials. Great for large organizations, particularly ones interconnected with VPNs. PDQ Inventory isn't so great for PCs that aren't connected to the same LAN the server is on. (i.e. non-vpn remote users) They used to have a remote agent you could install, but it was removed after numerous issues.
Read full review
Red Hat
For automating the configuration of a multi-node, multi-domain (Storage, VM, Container) cluster, Ansible is still the best choice; however, it is not an easy task to achieve. Creating the infrastructure layer, i.e., creating network nodes, VMs, and K8s clusters, still can't be achieved via Ansible. Additionally, error handling remains complex to resolve.
Read full review
Pros
PDQ
  • Push out new software
  • Push out Updates to current software
  • Push out patches and updates that we don't have other ways to push out
  • Keep end-users updated with little involvement
Read full review
Red Hat
  • Debugging is easy, as it tells you exactly within your job where the job failed, even when jumping around several playbooks.
  • Ansible seems to integrate with everything, and the community is big enough that if you are unsure how to approach converting a process into a playbook, you can usually find something similar to what you are trying to do.
  • Security in AAP seems to be pretty straightforward. Easy to organize and identify who has what permissions or can only see the content based on the organization they belong to.
Read full review
Cons
PDQ
  • As good as there email support is.. would like a live operator option
  • Some updates are hard to understand when 5 versions of the same program exist
  • Thats about it, PDQ deploy is the best out there
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
PDQ
PDQ is very useful and one of the tools that we use a lot.
Read full review
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
PDQ
Logical - If I want to do something with the software, it is quite clear on how I need to go about that. There isn't some weird process that is proprietary to just that vendor and is counterintuitive. What I want to see is displayed with just a couple clicks.
Read full review
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
PDQ
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
PDQ
The built-in help menus and general ease of use render whatever systems support there might be almost irrelevant. There is stability in the system's simplicity; if you're in the position to use such a product, you're your own best friend. Simple web searches more often than not turn up the solution to any little niggles, such as what silent install switches specific applications require (a remarkably wide choice of options exist). System updates are timely and unobtrusive, installing in no time at all. Maybe I've just been lucky; if so, long may it continue!
Read full review
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
PDQ
No answers on this topic
Red Hat
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
PDQ
This software was referred to us by an IT professional. Previously, we were installing the software with the help of remote desktop applications but it was very time consuming; it was wasting the user's time since he could not use his computer. After testing PDQ Deploy, we just never looked back.
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
PDQ
  • Speed of deployment is very positive for new software setup, saving hours of testing and deployment locally
  • Made patching for large computer estate very efficient, another positive for staff not having to spend hours of patching individual machines
  • Works well for small team of IT's and again makes various repetitive tasks much easier
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