We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Orchestration and Control-M based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I find the provisioning to be the most valuable."
"The best feature of BMC TrueSight Orchestration is the number of integrated mechanisms it provides."
"The automation helps in payment transactions through BHIM app. The BMC helps in smooth clearance of all payments without using MasterCard or Visa. The solution is ready to use, and there is no need for customization or resources. We can complete integration over cloud and on-premise, and even using mainframes. The automation are secure through BMC TrueSight Orchestration."
"The initial setup is easy. The deployment was done in an hour."
"The best thing about TrueSight is the user interface, which is intuitive and easy to use. It supports accessibility and exporting, so we can output to the format we require. We can use TrueSight to integrate nearly any other product. I can't think of another product that can match this functionality. We also have Microsoft Orchestrator, but it can't match BMC TrueSight Orchestration."
"We can implement compliance standards with the solution. You can also do patching so that the environment is compliant and secure from external threats and hacking. We can provision multiple systems with the help of predefined templates that the organization has forwarded us. The solution’s users can also integrate multiple products which can be either BMC or non-BMC. There are numerous possibilities that can be done with server automation"
"This solution is scalable."
"We particularly like the integration functionality of this solution. This product is open API, which means that it can be integrated with any solution from any other brand."
"The ability to integrate file transfers has been instrumental in allowing us to accomplish the things we need with Control-M. In our industry, we take a lot of data and either push it down to the stores or retail grocery stores. We take files and push them down to the stores or pull files and information from the stores and bring it back to corporate. So, it's two-way communication with file transfers. One of the bigger things that we do with Control-M is scheduling data moves and moving data from one location to another."
"The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job."
"The solution is innovative. Specifically for the overseas and time differences, you can feel the efficiency of Batch Impact Manager on jobs, batch processing, and impact management. It works the best on these kinds of issues. It saves us time and money, which is important. We save a lot using Control-M."
"Cross-platform support: A Linux job can be dependent on a Windows job, which can be dependent on many other flavours of hardware/software. Your batch is therefore managed by a single tool, allowing you to monitor your entire flow."
"The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the features and perform various tasks."
"Promotions between environments, as well as local, mass update, versioning, and self-service."
"Control-M has helped to improve our data transfers because it allows us to monitor the execution of the process. With other technologies, we cannot do that."
"If a job fails, that development team is notified right away, which improves reliability. Previously, it was on the operators to notify the developers that their job failed, erred, or aborted. Now, it's all automated."
"The solution should move to the cloud. Every application from the BMC is on the container and moving to the cloud. There is also a number of limitations for the smart reporting feature of the TrueSight server which is not working in sync. We did not get any satisfactory reply from BMC on that note. We are not able to do the real-time sync between HSA and non-HSA service reporting tools and the actual application tools."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration is difficult to understand. It's not very user-friendly."
"It would be helpful if TrueSight could log errors in a better format. I would also like to see more connector support. Let's say I have a third-party vendor that I need to integrate with Ansible. It would be helpful if BMC announced a specific connector for that. I've encountered situations where I need to work with scripts or find another way to integrate a particular product with TrueSight Orchestration. BMC already supports many products. For example, we have a connector for Ansible, but I think it needs to be improved some."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"We are aiming for AI automation and look for support from BMC. The features are currently missing but we are hoping for some upgrade in this matter."
"The architecture of this solution needs improvement, it is very complicated. It creates a lot of problems in our environment. Most of the time I am trying to find and solve the problem."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration could improve by providing some visibility on how the workflows are progressing."
"At present this solution is only available to be hosted on-premises, which can cause network issues when integration with cloud-based software is attempted."
"I am unsure if Control-M is compliant with Microsoft Azure environment integrations. We have some clients in Azure environments. Specifically, in Canada, government agencies and nonprofits mostly use Microsoft Azure."
"They can improve their interface."
"They really need to work on improving the web interface, as there are still a lot of bugs... In general, they need to do a lot of work on shoring up their testing and quality assurance. A lot of bugs seem to make it into the product."
"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"
"I would like to see more audit report templates added, and perhaps more customizability in terms of reporting."
"The report form and display function are weak; they are not very powerful."
"The reporting functionality needs a lot of work. We have faced problems with different versions where we run the right report, but it gives us blank entries. Then, when we run the same report again, it gives the correct data."
"The stability could be improved. I ran into an issue with a recent Control-M patch. The environment would become unstable if security ports were scanned. This is an area they need to improve on, but ultimately it's a relatively small improvement."
BMC TrueSight Orchestration is ranked 15th in Process Automation with 9 reviews while Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews. BMC TrueSight Orchestration is rated 8.0, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Orchestration writes "An orchestration tool to automate the end-to-end process with a need to improve its user experience". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". BMC TrueSight Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ServiceNow Orchestration, CA Process Automation and Camunda, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence. See our BMC TrueSight Orchestration vs. Control-M report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
