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
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a Linux distribution mainly used in commercial data centers.
Puppet has Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform beat on metrics. This isn't a fair comparison due to the agent oriented nature of puppet. Ansible is much smoother to start using and appreciably faster to install, configure and role into small groups of systems. I no longer use …
I used puppet prior to moving to open source Ansible and eventually to Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. I appreciate the agentless approach of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and feel that its deterministic approach to applying code is superior to puppet
One of these is already included in our license and the other is not. The agent based model makes access management to servers simpler. The agentless model makes things more flexible and secure for large organizations
There's 0 comparison. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform leaves them in the dust. It is easier to configure and wipe playbooks for, and has way more community support and documentation making it a no brainer.
For the most part pretty well. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform will always have room for improvement for a while since it really is a bit of a moving target and will always strive for new capabilities. RHEL of course has been around for some time and it does what it is …
Can't have one without the other! Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform drives our RHEL environment, and our RHEL environment made Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform the obvious choice.
Rocky Linux. CentOS, Arch about every distribution of Linux. Stability and reliability are king and the support. If something happens or you just hit a bug, that's why you go to Red Hat.
autoamtion is one of the key drive and growth of any orgnisation which helps to drive new innovation and reduce manual intervention which helps all the engineers within team to select right way to automate things which reduce human error overall. We have OS patching through Red …
Yes Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) against since the market is adopting Red Hat world wide and customers are like using it various platform automations and innovations using CI/CD pipelines that bring the application partner to deploy the code on premised basis with in less …
I feel that Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is more user friendly than SLES. There are slight differences and I think Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) has the edge over SLES.
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.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is best suited for its stability, fast reboot time, and minimal resource requirements which reduce overall cost. The patch time for Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) is also extremely fast which benefits application up time. For environments or applications that require many changes, for a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) support person that is not well trained and experienced in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL), this can be challenging.
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).
Virtualization, like the operating system level task. I see this product is very good and it blends very well with the middleware components like all the JBoss and other things. And other than that, either you install it or a virtual machine or physical servers, it works seamlessly anywhere. And if you want to go further, like Red Hat OpenShift or those things also work very nice with it.
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.
In the LEAP process. The upgrading process, which I'm hearing, like I said it before, prior that I was on rail seven, eight, and nine. Trying to get all of that to rail nine and stay current. The LEAP process from seven to eight is a little bit less than desired. I've talked to some people that from once you get on eight from eight to nine to nine to 10 is a breeze. So I'm looking forward to that.
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.
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
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) distro is the simplest enterprise version of Red Hat that is enterprise supported and when you deploy as many VMs as we do, it is vital to have that enterprise support. On top of the enterprise support, having access to a commercially supported backbone for updates and upgrades is a huge plus.
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.
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.
Red Hat support has really come a long way in the last 10 years, The general support is great, and the specialized product support teams are extremely knowledgeable about their specific products. Response time is good and you never need to escalate.
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.
So we in our company have used Ubuntu as well. Sometimes we have to use that because a certain application installer requires that we use that operating system, but we really don't prefer it just because it doesn't come with the same Add-on features that make Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) really great, like Red Hat Insights or Red Hat satellite, things like that. They come package with it. So that would be the main one. I've also used things like FreeBSD, but I think that's just too old at this point to care.
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..)