We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation and Fortra's JAMS based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AutoSys Workload Automation is highly regarded for its scalability, user-friendly interface, fast performance, and reliable accessibility. Fortra's JAMS is recognized for its impressive capacity to manage job dependencies, advanced automation features, and comprehensive monitoring and control functionalities.
AutoSys Workload Automation should enhance its integration with cloud services, reporting and comparison of job performance, customization of reporting features and alerts, file transfer job handling, workflow management, and workload window management. Fortra's JAMS should focus on improving its client interface, search capability, training resources, exception handling, browser version compatibility, custom execution methods, integration with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, source control features, documentation, ACL or access permission area, connectivity issues, error notifications, and compliance with the open-source GPG program.
Service and Support: AutoSys is highly regarded for its standardized approach and mature product, while JAMS is known for its fast response time and abundance of documentation and training resources.
Ease of Deployment: Users find the initial setup process for AutoSys Workload Automation to be simple, quick, and uncomplicated, taking approximately 10 minutes or less. Fortra's JAMS setup is also straightforward and easy, with users able to quickly deploy tasks by following instructions on the webpage.
Pricing: AutoSys Workload Automation has a yearly subscription and an annual license. It requires an additional cost for agents, while the server setup has a one-time license and an annual maintenance cost. Fortra's JAMS has an initial license cost for the first year, along with an annual maintenance cost. Users consider JAMS to be reasonable and cost-effective when compared to similar products.
ROI: AutoSys Workload Automation and Fortra's JAMS both offer significant benefits in terms of time savings, increased productivity, and cost-effectiveness. AutoSys provides improved reliability, scalability, and enhanced visibility and control, while JAMS offers automation and improved process robustness.
Comparison Results: AutoSys Workload Automation is preferred over Fortra's JAMS. Users praise AutoSys for its scalability, ease of use, speed, and availability. They appreciate its user-friendly interface, robustness in triggering jobs, and ability to handle large volumes. They also like its simplicity, stability, and ability to connect different software processes.
"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."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"To me, what's most valuable in AutoSys Workload Automation is its robustness and quickness. The tool can trigger jobs within a few milliseconds, and it can handle large volumes of jobs."
"It is stable, it works, and it does what it is supposed to."
"The capabilities of the product to schedule on multiple platforms, multiple operating systems."
"I prefer AutoSys over the other ones out there for ease of use, ease of understanding, and getting people to understand how the tool works."
"The customized views that each individual can create, and views that can be made free-form, makes this very popular with the programmers."
"It is a fairly stable solution."
"The feature or capability to import a job is most valuable. We can import an existing job from different platforms, and all the configurations get migrated as well without modifying the code, job schedule, etc."
"We looked at other companies, like VisualCron, that were cheaper, but one of the main sticking points was the fact that they wouldn't have provided a central location for us to monitor across all servers. That was one of the biggest selling points of JAMS."
"The planning capabilities are most valuable."
"It makes everything that we want to do so much easier. We have had a number of instances in the past where we have had developers who have been working on a project, and even though we have had JAMS for all these years, they will create some SQL Server Agent job, or something like that, to run a task. When it is in code review and development is complete, the question always comes around, "Can JAMS do this?" The answer has always been, "Yes." Pretty much anything we have ever developed could be run by JAMS."
"The ability to sequence jobs is excellent; it means we don't have to schedule them individually, and if one fails, it doesn't unwind the entire workflow."
"The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful."
"While I appreciate the other features, the agent stands out for its ease of installation and configuration for JAMS monitoring."
"It's a full-featured job scheduling tool. The part that I liked the best was the support team. This tool was new, and we were all learning it and setting up the different jobs that were complex in nature. Their support team was very responsive in helping us out through the setup and resolving the issues. They have been incredibly awesome."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"AutoSys Workload Automation could improve the integration."
"In terms of what should be in the next release, I want integration and AI and so on. I'd like easy reporting where you can compare information, for example, "that job normally takes three minutes and last time it took six minutes or 10 minutes." Then you can get the information to the engineer of which job is taking more time than normal - understanding strange behavior compared to the baseline."
"An area for improvement in AutoSys Workload Automation is that it lacks advanced features or advanced built-in functionalities found in competitors, for example, an advanced workflow feature. Even the handling or notification from AutoSys Workload Automation isn't the best in the industry. Other products have very good workflow-related functionalities such as ActiveBatch that's missing in AutoSys Workload Automation, so I wish the tool had those features."
"I would like to see two-factor authentication, since you see a lot of companies in the news for security breaches. That is a really big thing for us."
"More benefits with the agent upgrades, and that's about it. Other than that we have no complaints with it. It's been awesome."
"It would be helpful to be able to monitor and manage workload windows so we could minimize downstream applications. This would allow us easier access to the applications."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"Sometimes the UI is not the most responsive I've ever used. But because it does its job, I don't complain."
"When looking at a folder in JAMS with many jobs, it would be good to have better information in the list display of what's inside those jobs. We get some information, but other important details are missing."
"The tabs in the JAMS file transfer could be clearer. It would help us demonstrate to our client that JAMS not only automates jobs but also does fast transfers, and it's an alternative that supports and filters different kinds of platforms. Filtering file transfers will be highly beneficial to them."
"I'm not sure if they have fixed it in a newer version, but there is no global search in the version I have. If I have multiple sub-folders that are named for business units, like HR or IT, and I have to search for a job, I cannot search from the top. I have to go to the HR folder to search for a particular job, or to the IT folder."
"The UI could be better. There were some things that were not quite intuitive, such as the search tool. When we tried to search for jobs, we had to clear the entire search and then go in and enter the new search query. That's something that wasn't intuitive for a new user."
"The ACL or access permission area needs to be improved. When it comes to defining and providing security permissions, it's a bit confusing if you are new to JAMS. JAMS needs to improve the features for security access or permissions."
"The biggest area with room for improvement is the area that my organization benefits the most from using JAMS, and that is in custom execution methods. I happen to have a very good C# developer. Ever since we got JAMS, he has spent a lot of time talking to JAMS developers, researching the JAMS libraries, and creating custom execution methods. He's gotten very good at it. He is now able to create them and maintain them very easily, but that knowledge was hard-won knowledge. It was difficult to come by, and if I should ever lose this developer, then I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who could create JAMS custom execution methods quite as well as he can since there really isn't all that much help, such as documentation or information, available on how to create custom execution methods."
"I would like to see the ability to interface with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, but they're still in the research phase. They need to ensure everything's legit and safe. The report designer and dashboards could also be improved. We're running 7.3, so I don't know if they have updated the reporting in 7.5, but I think the reports and dashboards could be better."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while Fortra's JAMS is ranked 5th in Workload Automation with 27 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Fortra's JAMS is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortra's JAMS writes "We can scale up our organization's scheduling and automation without having to add staff to the department". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automic Workload Automation and Stonebranch, whereas Fortra's JAMS is most compared with Control-M, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and VisualCron. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Fortra's JAMS 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.
