Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. Stonebranch

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Stonebranch
Score 10.0 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
Stonebranch provides enterprise-wide workload automation software solutions that are designed to solve complex IT business processes in a simple way - from Amazon Web Services, Docker, OpenStack, Hadoop, Microsoft Azure to z/OS batch processes on the mainframe. Stonebranch’s Universal Automation Center (UAC) is a system of four enterprise workload automation products: Universal Controller Universal Agent Universal Data Mover Universal Data Mover…N/A
Pricing
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Editions & Modules
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
AnsibleStonebranch
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional DetailsCommercial models include Perpetual, Subscription & Usage-based and clients can choose the model that best suits their business. The Stonebranch software license models allow for unlimited concurrent and named users and the Perpetual and Subscription models include unlimited job executions per day – there are no license upgrades due to tasks per day increases. Licenses for a Disaster Recovery site are offered free of charge.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Features
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
8.6
Ratings
7% above category average
Stonebranch
-
Ratings
Infrastructure Automation9.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated Provisioning8.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Parallel Execution8.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Node Management8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Reporting & Logging7.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Version Control8.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Small Businesses
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Apache Airflow
Apache Airflow
Score 8.6 out of 10
Enterprises
HashiCorp Terraform
HashiCorp Terraform
Score 8.5 out of 10
Control-M
Control-M
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Likelihood to Recommend
9.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.7
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.2
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
8.6
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformStonebranch
Likelihood to Recommend
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
No answers on this topic
Pros
  • 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
No answers on this topic
Cons
  • 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
No answers on this topic
Likelihood to Renew
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
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
No answers on this topic
Performance
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
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
I spoke on this topic today!
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • 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
No answers on this topic
ScreenShots

Stonebranch Screenshots

Screenshot of Drag & Drop InterfaceScreenshot of Integrated DashboardsScreenshot of User Definition