Automic Automation Reviews

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.

In our company, we use it for the following:

• Scheduling of SAP and ERP jobs.
• Backing up most of our servers.
• ITSM and scheduling using the automation agent.
• Running our non-ERP jobs, or for some other applications. 
• File transfer and automation services.

We were using UC4, which was very good. We have had some challenges within the application as it moves forward to the new features. 

For example, our users are used to the flatline of the UC4. When we introduced the AVI, they are not interested nor motivated to use it.

There are some challenges because of the new features and the new change of interfaces. Nevertheless, we use this application to organize our jobs and to integrate the applications within the company. It is useful for report generation and backups.

It is good and efficient in terms of workload.

• File transfer
• The solution for rocket automation, as a file transfer and its agents.
• Mostly SAP scripting.
• Integration with most of the platforms that we have within the company's Windows, Linux, and Unix. Integrating these inside the automation agent for scheduling, backups, file transfer, and SAP jobs.

We have a lot of file transfers with Quest. Hopefully, their product management can add this feature since we do the file transfers now with SharePoint.

We want to establish a service where we can be a file transfer expert for everything. We want an automation engine that we can use within our company. We would like to use this particular software to provide file transfer service.

It is more stable now. In the previous versions 8 and 10, it is more stable, but with the AVI version 12, it is more complicated and we encounter a lot of problems. We need to install hot pieces and badges every time, so it means downtime for us. This is starting from version 12, which is why we are not happy with it. 

It provides a large scale for us, because it is flexible, in terms of usage. We have done a proof of concept within this application.

I think we are known to the technical support. Unfortunately, the technical support does not help much with our problems until you get to the gurus due to the complexity of our problems.

Automation is very powerful. This solution is flexible in terms of platform integration. They need better CA support , because in terms of issues and problem solving, the support is not good. It would be much better if CA had some dedicated support to customers.

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.

We are working with telecoms to automate workloads. The use cases include automation from inception to activation. Some use cases also deal with professional services.

Our use cases are reflected in the cloud-based Workload Automation.

The ease of deployment makes it easier when it comes to the development and testing of the automations.

It integrates well with the CICD pipeline.

We would like a way to test our cloud-based automations on-premises, and then migrate them to the cloud after they have been tested, without needing an additional license. As developers, this would help us.

In the future, I would like to see a system where each developer works on their own changes, and they are submitted to a controller. At that point, the controller has the option to accept or reject changes from each of the developers.

I have been working with Automic Workload Automation for about four years.

I use many tools in combination with this product including Jenkins, GitHub, and GitLab.

This is a very stable product and personally, I have not had any issues with it. Our vision includes continuing to use it in the future.

Automic Workload Automation is scalable. I have experience with larger companies in different regions and I can say that a high number of IT staff, between 70% and 85% use automation tools.

For this product specifically, there are between 40 and 45 users.

Personally, I do not have experience with technical support. However, I think people in our team have been in contact with them.

We did not have a plan to adopt this product and didn't even discover it right away. Rather, we followed the new technologies and came up with new strategies that led us to it.

The initial setup is easy.

The first time we installed it, the process took between 30 and 45 minutes. After that, we replicated the installation and to deploy it takes no more than 10 minutes.

My team is responsible for the deployment. One person is enough for the task. For the implementation from end-to-end, it should take between six and twelve hours.

There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

This is absolutely a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Workload Automation to control all our processes and the batch control.

We are working with version 10, and need to upgrade to version 12.2.

• The product is clear and very visual. 
  
• We receive feedback right at the moment that we need it. 
• We are able to control and change our processes when necessary.

At the moment, we have clear batches to see workflows to control.

In the next version, I do not know what is coming up for us.

The workflows should be clearer and more expressive. I need this going forward.

We have downtime during every upgrade. In the normal process, it works fine. 

It is scalable.

We are now in extended support. We are now in the change process, so we needed extended support.

When we contact support, we can get through to the right person to receive the correct answers.

The product has helped save, time, money, and resources. It has given us a competitive advantage in our industry. 

Use the product. Support is good and it works fine.

The primary use case is for automation in the area of SAP, as a specific solution in time management and access control systems. We are providing for this for any of our customers who use the automation engine. It is performing well.

The product has benefited our organization. It saves time and manpower.

Process automation.

The user interface has room for improvement.

I would like to see the event engine in the next release.

It is a stable product.

It has a normal scale for working with the tool.

We use support when we make release changes. Technical support has been good to work with. They have been easier to reach now than in the past.

We did not have a previous solution, just something we built in-house. We have been using this solution for 20 years.

The initial setup was easy. We have used it for 20 years, so we set it up in a special way. We were installation number 30 for this product. We have been working with it for a long time.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: multi-platform usability.

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 are a reseller and solution provider, and this is one of the products that we provide for our customers.

This is a conversion product, and we use this solution to assist customers who are converting from another product. Our primary focus is one-for-one migration, bringing it up to the next level and getting it ready for the next phase.

This solution saves our organization time, in terms of management. It is also more systematic and gives us more control. It is easy to learn.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler.

The workflow is object-oriented.

The source code is centralized, rather than being deployed to the individual servers.

There are always ways that technical support can be improved.

I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution.

In terms of stability, so far so good. We have not encountered any bugs in this solution.

Our proposal matches the average, so we have not needed the solution to grow.

The plan is to increase usage once this solution is stabilized. We are hoping that this is in the near future.

I have worked with technical support, and we are pretty happy with them. The response time is long, but they have been ok so far.

Prior to this, we used other products from the CA Automation family, but with different branding. We used the AutoSys d-Series Edition.

With respect to migration or conversion projects, the compilation is done with a conversion factory. This is done on-site, and after that, there is testing and production. The deployment time for a project is between three and six months.

Many of the things are handled by the CA Compilation team. We are on-site, assisting the technical team. We migrate across from the remote site to the client site.

There is a lot of coordination that has to be done with the customer. The environment, including the data, has to be ready.

Two or three people are required, on-site, for the deployment. One of them is an architect and two of them are engineers.

Once this solution is deployed, the customer takes over the operation, including the maintenance.

When our customers have a lot of manual processes, the automation will reduce the number of human errors that occur. This will reduce the cost.

I began using this product just after it was acquired by CA. We have four to five people who have been trained on CA Workload Automation across all of the developing nations.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to carefully look at the environment. Some manual processes can be converted, but some are best left done using human manual input. If this is the case then you have to convert these into a scripted document image.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.