Automic Automation Reviews

• Check-out
• Check-in
• Promote
• Demote

Just that the basic functionality works.

It saves State assets, for starters. Saving State assets is part of my job, and it's important. So that's how it's improving State work. We have a tool that secures and controls State assets.

Certainly, the Visual Studio plugin has a lot of room for improvement.

We need to improve communication. It's a mistake to send all the work over to India, that's my personal opinion. I think there's a real problem with communication in India. I've been on the phone with these folks and wasted my time, where we don't even understand what they're saying. I think the development of this tool should be brought back to the United States. I think it's a mistake to have it done it in India, where a real communication problem exists.

20 years.

Absolutely.

The scalability is not as much of a problem.

Escalation comes from the technical team in the United States to Level 2 in India.

We switched over 20 years ago.

Setup was complex due to the complexity of the tool.

If we had a choice to choose again, we'd choose something different.

We've been plugged into the product for 20 years now, so it's a little difficult to do that, although I have teams or agencies now, that are breaking away and they're going and using other tools now. I got one agency using TFS. I've got another agency using GitHub, so I'm seeing the breaking down of this whole process. A lot of it has to do with the stability of the Visual Studio plugin, which has not been very good.

Don't use the Visual Studio plugin. Go and use TFS. It's more seamless and it's a bigger tool. It will cost you more money, but you won't have some of the complexities, in terms of folks being able to do check-outs and check-ins. This Visual Studio plugin has been very complicated for the State of New Hampshire. It's caused a lot of problems. It's made me lose a lot of customers. I lost 81 customers last week alone. They don't like the product and I understand why. They have people in India developing it, who don't understand English, most of the time.

Even when you try to convey your message to them, there's all kinds of problems with dialog and interpretation that sometimes you get what you ask for, and sometimes you don't. Most of the time, you don't. You end up going back and forth, and back and forth to get any fix, then you get another re-fix. Then, you get another re-fix.

• Workload and system automation 
• We run our batch schedules through the system and have also automated very complex processes to allow Operations perform tasks that were previously done by Sys Admins.

Allowed us to almost fully automate our batch schedule and to provide our Operations team with a single interface for monitoring batch and automated system processes.

• File transfer is excellent 
• Very intuitive interface (Java version) 
• Process flows are very easy to build.
• Events are useful to trigger process flows based on external factors.
• Zero downtime upgrade is a great idea!

• New web interface is not fit for purpose
• Users should continue to have access to the Java GUI 
• Support can be a bit slow responding to non-critical issues

We are using it for batch automation and protection. We can control and check it, which is the main thing. When the batches must be run, we need a perfect system for it to run. It must run 24 hours, seven days a week, with no interruptions.

Its benefit is time. When you have the automation going, it just runs. We have no problems with any of the automation. 

We have costs for an Oracle database, and it is a high cost. However, we think we can do this on a Windows database, which is cheaper. We will do this the next few years, so it will be better. 

We have long-time planning and forecasts. In the forecasts, we can change our workloads in the future to save us any problems. Whether it is three days or three weeks, we will regularly change our processes if that is our problem. Therefore, we can do a long time planning, if necessary.

The features of the calendar are the most valuable, then the scripting. With the scripting, we can script all things, which is a first. As far as our schedules, if we have problems, we can create our own process in the automation, which is good.

The forecast and long-term planning could be made a little better when you work with it in the future.

At the moment, the stability is good. We are experiencing a technical problem with the system, in regards to the VPN, which we hope will be fixed in the next few years.

We can expand it. We have products and software in the firm, and we do the risk management. Risk management from Atomic could be in the next year, and this will be a difficult change for us and the product which we run at the moment.

We have used technical support in the last three months. They are good. If we have problems, we can get an answer in three hours. Support is very fast.

The initial setup was complicated and difficult.

It has helped us reduce costs.

Compared to our other products, it is a good price.

We evaluate vendors every year to see if it is possible to change. We look everywhere.

We have had Atomic since 2005. It was the only software with scheduling on the mainframe for clients. 

Look at it and test it, because it is a very good product.

We are using mainly Workload Automation for all types of jobs over different servers and operating systems.

Without automation, it would be nearly impossible to do all the jobs that we are doing.

It is flexible. We can do additional scripting in Automic script, in combination with JSL language.

Documentation is not great. It was previously much better.

I would like to see features from "Prompt" sets in read Masks.

At the moment, we are using 2.0. The job automation is okay. The main functions are stable. There are bugs though.

It is scalable.

We used just shell scripts and crontab.

The initial setup was straightforward.

In some of our departments, it has had a great impact on efficiency, costs, and resources.

I would recommend Workload Automation.

We use Automic Workload Automation (AWA) for different things in the company, e.g., batch-bookings, archiving, virus scans, flight plans, etc. It is used for everything in the travel business which has IT. We do a lot of batch things within the industry, as it is a wide field.

The company does not notice our team much, which is not so good. However, that is because we can are quick and solve problems before they happen. We monitor and see where problems might occur, so we are not noticed so much in the company, but it helps in avoiding problems.

The automation helps a company to do things without manual processes. This is the definition: Without having to do so many things manually. 

One example that we have with a new customer is that they hosted their programs and everything themselves. The developers received calls almost every second night saying, “We have a problem,” without having on-call duty, but they did not have any on-call duty. Yet, they still received calls saying, “There's a problem.” They just had to rerun something, and it worked. Yet, every second night, they got called. 

With the automated solution they are now happy, because we can easily say, “If it breaks down, it might be a networking problem. Just restart three times and after about five minutes, run it, and it will be okay." Nobody gets called and everything works. The solution is easy for them now. For us, it is a small thing. It helps a lot, not only in huge business problems, but with the smaller ones. We have a much better night sleep and can develop their stuff better.

You can create very fine, granular workflows with a lot of possibilities. It gives you the possibility to do things in many ways. We do not have so many cases where you just can copy information here and there. Our customers have special needs, and we can use the tool to do that.

I am heading up the AWI. I desperately miss the possibility to show my read-only users on the Explorer side only their folders, not all the folders. This is something I would like to have on the dashboards (for example), where I can show them from an assembly side just their folders, not all the folders. They should have only rights to their folders, so why are they able to see all the other folders? It is confusing for them and not very comfortable. I told this to the developers already.

It is quite stable. I have been with the company for a year and a half, and in that time, we have not had any major breakdowns. We do not have many issues with the stability at the moment. 

We are now testing on the new release and the AWI. We are a little skeptical about what is coming up, but we will wait and see.

I am a little new to the administration. At the moment, we are planning the new release where it will be easier to scale it to our needs. Though, I can't say anything about the actual version that we use at the moment.

I have raised several incidents. I have been quite content with how they have gotten back to me, which is good. Even with the transformation now to CA, I like the way they work.

The initial setup was very complex. This company and the one that I worked at before found the very first migration from whole systems, like TWS, to the Automic product challenging. They were not used to all the features that it had. Though, I did not hear a lot of complaints about it.

I would encourage people to use the solution.

This solution has many use cases because it's automation, so the sky is the limit. It can be useful for any workloads—DD operation, disaster recovery, data center automation—required by the customer. 

This solution is deployed on-prem. 

The most valuable features are its robustness, it's highly scalable, and it's easy to implement. 

This solution's out-of-box automation sets could be improved. They could be industry standardized out-of-box, or even runbook automation processes could be useful—just some plug-and-play automation processes out-of-box. It has many integration capabilities, from APIs to databases, but if the customer sees some out-of-box automation processes in it, it could be useful. 

As for additional features, a best practices library could be good. Also, maybe more technology connectors, in order to connect and run the automation, so more out-of-box integration points. 

We have been dealing with Automic for around three years. 

This solution is highly scalable. In our country, we have more than 30 customers using this solution. 

I would rate support an eight out of ten. From a customization point of view, it requires some technical knowledge. 

The installation is very straightforward. The time it will take depends on the implementation and the size of the project—it can range from one day to five days. A team of one to three people could be enough for deployment. 

We implement this solution for clients. 

They have changed the pricing on their licensing, and it's cheaper than before. 

I rate Automic Workload Automation a nine out of ten. I recommend this solution to others. 

We use it for batch processing. It is performing well.

We are doing the end of day processing, as we are a bank. It is very important for us that we do not have one hour of downtime, because we are online the whole day, 24/7.

It helps our efficiency because it is a batch processing tool which works without a menu.

We are an old-fashioned company. We are only using the product for batch processing.

I would like a good AWI in the next release. The AWI is not fully functional at this time.

The stability is not as good as it could be, because we are on version 10, but it is okay.

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. Then, after a few months, they get more stability, and we are happy with it.

The scalability is great.

Sometimes technical support is very good, and sometimes it is very bad. They do not see the problems which we have. We have to escalate it to our product manager. When we need a fix, they say, "The fix is in the next version. Please wait while we make updates."

Use Automic or CA Workload Automation, as it is the best tool.

Our primary use of this product is to automate our ERP system.

• ECUs
• Easy scheduling
• Reliability

The benefit of this particular solution is that we are familiar with the product already. Therefore when implementing this system, it will have a lot of the same characteristics as the old one. So it is the ease of transition made easier rather than going to a new automation system.

The stability is very good. We have not had any crashes or downtime with it in our testing. We are very happy with it and it runs pretty fast.  

We are a small organization. We do not run that many jobs, so we do not plan on scaling it up much.

I have used technical support and the community, as well. I have found to get answers quickly to solutions that worked - asking both the technical support and the community.

We actually have an older product AppWorks 6.0 that we currently use, and we are transitioning from AppWorks to Automation several months from now. We are currently in the developmental stage. 

The current solution we have is not supported, which is why we are switching.

I was initial in the initial setup. It was complex. We had a person come in from CA and assist us with the setup. It went smoothly. It took us about a week to get it up and running. However, it has been up and running, and we have not had any real issues with it since. 

We still actually have not implemented this version as it is in its test phase.

It would be good to have some dashboards that come with the package rather than it be a cost to add them on.  

We looked at this solution and we also look at another company. The reason we went with this solution is because we had been working with them for a long time and we trusted their products. For us, our learning curve would not be as steep.

They have gone from UC4 to Automic to CA in a very short amount of time, so they changed their face a lot. With those changes, they are actually doing a lot more technical advances. I think that they are a product that is continually growing, which is good.

Look at this product. Give it a shot, but also understand what your needs are. Look at several products before coming to a decision on what you want to do to resolve your ERP issues.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: A partner who is truly interesting in helping us meet our goals and who can provide a solution in a fast, reliable timeframe.