We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and IBM 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 strength, adaptability, and straightforward setup. It provides the capability to oversee various operating systems and products. IBM Workload Automation permits users to ask for added features and can initiate tasks across multiple nodes.
Automic Workload Automation can enhance its offerings in various aspects including pre-configured automation sets, multilingual support, features, user interface, web-based edition functionalities, file transfer management, pricing options, and customer assistance. IBM Workload Automation faces performance difficulties, navigation complexities, and requires enhancements in job dependencies, scheduling refreshes, simulation capabilities, system stability, reporting visibility, and API integration.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation is known for its satisfactory customer service, while IBM Workload Automation is highly regarded for its exceptional technical support. IBM's lab advocacy program offers in-depth code support, which sets it apart. Automic may encounter challenges in identifying the source of certain issues.
Ease of Deployment: Automic Workload Automation's initial setup duration varies based on the project size, requiring a team of one to three individuals. IBM Workload Automation's setup may pose challenges for individuals unfamiliar with IBM tools. Nevertheless, with guidance, the process becomes relatively easy.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a higher setup cost as it is determined by the number of systems being orchestrated. IBM. Automic's pricing is considered to be one of the most expensive in the market.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation's value was not mentioned, however, it is often viewed as an extra cost. IBM Workload Automation strives to enhance efficiency, decrease expenses, and boost productivity, with ROI differing depending on specific objectives and use cases.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred option over IBM Workload Automation,. Automic stands out for its strength, scalability, simplicity of implementation, and wide range of features. It enables management of various operating systems and products, which is particularly beneficial for environments with a combination of outdated and modern technologies. Automic also provides predefined templates for specific tasks and allows different users to have access.
"It works. It does not fail. If something fails, it is not Automic."
"Customers save a lot of money when they use this product, because of things like the scheduling tool."
"It's easy to train other people. A new developer could come in and learn it very quickly."
"It's very hard to transfer the feeling when you have a platform that came to handle infrastructure issues, but at the end of the day, they are making real changes and impacting our business level, which is amazing, because it's very uncommon. That's it, basicalSly."
"The product has benefited our organization. It saves time and manpower."
"Stability has been great. My team, we call ourselves "the invisibles" because things run so well that sometimes you almost feel like you have to try to break something to actually get acknowledged."
"The scalability is good because you can add on as many services and processes as you want."
"The modulation of some of the things, like how the things are connected and disconnected. You have different login objects that you can quickly put to other different objects and other objects that you create, which makes transporting things very easy from one environment to the next."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"The DWC, when configured correctly, is a great GUI tool to provide Self-Service Scheduling capabilities to the user community."
"The technical support is great, the product is easy-to-use, and it is stable."
"Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The whole product is valuable because it is a tool for batch automation."
"Our area with the CA solution for DR is not really concerning directly to Automic, but to all of the DevOps, a word which is something that everybody is trying to touch on today in their daily business. There is also some gap that's a little bit hard to understand or to implement because not all the organizations are the same. When you are adopting DevOps, you may need to be more flexible in your processes."
"There are some scripting elements that could be added."
"The frustration that we have probably had in the past is where CA tools run for a period of time, then they get deprecated, and you have to build a new one."
"We would like to have some features with the AWI with the founding technique, which cannot currently be delivered."
"If you're getting deep into some of these workflows, you may have 20 different windows open and, if you didn't already have that deep understanding of how enterprise orchestration works, it would be very overwhelming to get up to speed on something like that... It needs some way to minimize the amount of windows and get it to where you could have all the information you need available on the screen."
"I would like to see features from "Prompt" sets in read Masks."
"The hotline can take a long time. They will say, "I will take it and give it to the Level 2 support.""
"Every time we have an upgrade for a new version, we have stability problems, because the versions are not as good as they should be."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile app that could be used to follow the job schedule."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"It should support other schedulers that aren't IBM products."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while IBM Workload Automation is ranked 14th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2. 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 IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and OpCon, whereas IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. IBM 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.
