We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and AutoSys Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Automic Workload Automation is highly praised for its robustness, scalability, and implementation simplicity. It provides control over various operating systems and products. AutoSys Workload Automation is valued for its scalability, user-friendly interface, and quick execution.
Automic Workload Automation needs industry-standardization and plug-and-play automation processes, improved language support, better functionality, a user-friendly interface, an enhanced web-based edition, and more competitive pricing. AutoSys Workload Automation users want integration with cloud services, easier reporting and comparison of job performance, better Linux environment integration, improved file transfer job handling, advanced features and functionalities, and the ability to monitor and manage workload windows.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation's customer service has received both positive and negative feedback. Some customers appreciate the prompt response and informative knowledge articles, while others have faced challenges in contacting the support team. AutoSys Workload Automation's customer service is highly acclaimed, with users describing it as excellent, helpful, and responsive. The support team is perceived as competent and equipped.
Ease of Deployment: Automic Workload Automation's setup duration varies from one to five days. AutoSys Workload Automation boasts a quick and uncomplicated setup process, requiring only 10 minutes or less. The simplicity of the setup may be influenced by the user's familiarity and needs.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation offers pricing based on the number of systems being orchestrated, which is considered expensive yet still affordable compared to similar solutions. AutoSys Workload Automation involves a yearly subscription and an annual license, with costs for agents and server setup that can vary.
ROI: There is a lack of ROI information for Automic Workload Automation. AutoSys offers various advantages including heightened productivity, enhanced efficiency, cost savings, improved visibility and control, and decreased downtime. However, the actual ROI may differ depending on factors like company size and workload complexity.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is highly recommended due to its impressive strength, scalability, and effortless implementation. Users appreciate its extensive range of features and intuitive interface. Automic's versatility in managing various operating systems and products is particularly valuable for environments that contain a blend of outdated and modern technologies.
"We use it in every aspect of our IT operations, and the scalability is very good."
"All the components that it can use to design work flow; process automation."
"It improves the visibility of what is going on on the system. If I have a problem, it is easy to identify, understand dependencies, and identifying the root causes than just running through scripts and searching through applications or servers."
"It works to automate business processes over all the systems. You have a central point where you can automate everything."
"It is 100% stable. We have no downtime. We have 24/7 production throughout the year."
"Automic Workload Automation is a highly complex yet versatile tool."
"We use it with automation, getting more speed to solve business processes."
"The company can expand with this product. Every time I bring in new ideas for solutions, it is with this product."
"It is a fairly stable solution."
"It gives us flexibility when doing releases. We can make changes for one day in a PDS member, since we stage our jobs by date, and the next day the normal job definitions are run."
"Automation of patch process."
"We use CA Workload Automation AE r11.3.6 to automate enterprise-wide scheduling and file transfers using an FTP plugin."
"Easy configuration and integration with SAP."
"We use technical support all the time. We would be lost without them. They're fantastic. Really good job. We're able to reach the right person to help us out right away."
"It is very valuable for us when we are trying to arrange or orchestrate jobs into a system. It is helpful for triggering jobs for a scheduled task."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"Content of file transfers cannot be searched by the system, but has to be done by the user interface. This is not good, as it has been erased often."
"The search is sometimes a little bit slow."
"We would like to have token-based authentication. Where we do not have to use a password, and can use tokens for authentication in other systems."
"The user interface has room for improvement."
"I hope in the next release that they will solve all the bugs which they have found in development."
"There are some scripting elements that could be added."
"There has to be a better way to visualize things in the application without having so many windows open."
"We would also like improved SLR monitoring. There are SLR objects, but I can't define an SLR object plus one, or end days. I can only do it for one day. As we are time shifting to another day, it is not possible. This should be improved."
"This product needs to improve its graphical user interface."
"We are trying to see if we can use this from a cloud perspective with AWS, Azure, and other clouds, but it seems that there is no cloud integration in this product. We would like to see cloud integration. We are very pleased with this solution, but we are moving our application to the cloud, and we found out that it doesn't support any cloud features. So, we are trying to find a replacement."
"A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"We had a few issues, however, the issues were more on the infrastructure rather than with the application itself."
"The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"The solution does not have a friendly subscription model because it forces users to take a five-year subscription simultaneously, charging millions of dollars."
"The visibility and control features are somewhat limited."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation, AppWorx Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation, whereas AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Stonebranch and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Automic Workload Automation report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.