Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs. TrueSight Orchestration

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
TrueSight Orchestration
Score 3.5 out of 10
N/A
TrueSight Orchestration (formerly Atrium Orchestrator) is datacenter automation software from BMC.N/A
Pricing
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformTrueSight Orchestration
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
AnsibleTrueSight Orchestration
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformTrueSight Orchestration
Features
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformTrueSight Orchestration
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
TrueSight Orchestration
-
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
Workload Automation
Comparison of Workload Automation features of Product A and Product B
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
-
Ratings
TrueSight Orchestration
8.0
Ratings
3% below category average
Multi-platform scheduling00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Central monitoring00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Logging00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Alerts and notifications00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Analysis and visualization00 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Application integration00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
User Ratings
Red Hat Ansible Automation PlatformTrueSight Orchestration
Likelihood to Recommend
9.5
(0 ratings)
7.0
(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 PlatformTrueSight Orchestration
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
Well Suited if running other BMC products Need well trained Level 2 & Level 3 Administration for day to day tasks
Read full review
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
  • Ease of Integration with other BMC products like BMC BSA , BNA ,Remedy & ITSM
  • Technical Support is good
  • Good documentation & Community Support
  • Integration with third party apps is good
Read full review
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
  • Complex initial setup
  • Integration with Cloud is missing
  • UI is old & traditional & not user friendly
Read full review
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
We choose Atrium Orchestrator since we are using other BMC products in our environment & integration to those products is simple
Read full review
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
  • Able to automate 50% of manual operations work
Read full review
ScreenShots