Digital.ai Release vs. Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Digital.ai Release
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Digital.ai Release, formerly XebiaLabs XL Release, is a release management tool designed for enterprises that enables users to control and track releases, standardize processes, and bake compliance and security into software release pipelines. As a release orchestration tool, Digital.ai Release works specifically for continuous delivery, and enables teams across an organization to model and monitor releases, automate tasks within IT infrastructure, in order to cut release times and improve…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
Digital.ai ReleaseRed 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
Digital.ai ReleaseAnsible
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Digital.ai ReleaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
Digital.ai ReleaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
Digital.ai Release
-
Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.6
Ratings
7% above category average
Infrastructure Automation00 Ratings9.20 Ratings
Automated Provisioning00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Parallel Execution00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Node Management00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Reporting & Logging00 Ratings7.80 Ratings
Version Control00 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Digital.ai ReleaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Small Businesses
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Enterprises
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Digital.ai ReleaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.5
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
4.0
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Digital.ai ReleaseRed Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Likelihood to Recommend
XL release fits very well when you need cross-team coordination in a release process where you want to coordinate an alpha or beta program with marketing as part of a major release process.
Read full review
I'm going to say it is best suited for configuration management. Like I said, patching even with security, things of that nature. Probably less suited is hardware management, but Red Hat IBM/IBM has Terraform for that. So it's a trade off.
Read full review
Pros
  • Cross-team release workflow control using email, texts, scripts allow our release management to be truly a 360 process.
  • XL Release allowing our Jenkins toolchain to control the beginning of release trains which is very powerful.
  • XL release allows us to expose the business process flow for anyone to read direct at the source which runs the process instead of a separate vision.
Read full review
  • 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
  • Pagination of data - across tool.
  • User Roles Management API can be improved.
  • Case insensitive ID's are treated differently making user face login and access issues.
  • Dependency on Universal template/custom plugins creation should be reduced.
  • Code versioning of templates is very difficult.
  • Better error handling.
  • Futures Timeout Issues.
Read full review
  • Ability to tell when a task has already been done
  • yaml configuration can be annoying at times, perhaps a built in lint so yq isn't needed
  • the become feature should be able to be set to true globally without using args
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
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
The tool is easy to use, easy to navigate and learn. Manages releases with proper approvals in a systematic manner. Though it needs minor improvements in terms of pagination (data loading), access management, but, overall the tool helps in increasing productivity and less time for production deployments.
Read full review
Overall it's good but the new architecture can be complex. Improvements can be made in the Config as Code capabilities for managing Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. Sometimes it can be difficult for those unfamiliar to understand the relationship between Projects/Credentials/Job Templates, etc.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
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
Support is not good at all. To this day, I have to mail my queries and their support site does not log in for me (me alone). But, upon contacting many times, no one helps with a proper response. Though good thing is, I get a proper response over mail too. But, being informative about the tool and not on the issues faced by users outside of the process to get support should also be addressed equally. Which is currently missing in support.
Read full review
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
No answers on this topic
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Deployment and release management can be done in various ways. But, XL Release or Digita.ai, helps in simplifying the process with predefined plugins, pre-developed security features, etc that help manage and process deployment cycles quicker and in a processed way.
Read full review
As I said earlier, Red Hat Ansible remains a top choice because it is a perfect combination of multiple capabilities. Terraform is good in IAC but not in config automation. Puppet is well-suited for developers, but not for system administrators and infrastructure integrators. OpenShift and Kubernetes are generic automators only.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Positive - Faster deployments.
  • Positive - Better tracking on progress of each release.
  • Negative - Data once goes beyond a limit, pagination and data load take a toll on users.
  • Positive - Dashboard can be customizable.
Read full review
  • We are still early in our implementation and don't have much yet - but I can say that it has already improved the time it takes to deploy a new virtual server for us, as well as making them more consistent.
  • In working through what jobs are required, it has really improved the communication between our different teams
Read full review
ScreenShots