Automic Automation Reviews

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.

Our customers use it for scheduling.

It performs quite well. It depends on the customer. Some customers do not use it with all the features that the product offers. They only use a small set of what the product can do.

Reliability: You can count on it.

It has saved my customers time, money, resources, and efficiency.

Monitoring is very good.

For power users, it does not work well for them at the moment.

The event monitoring is very good. It has become a great part of the product suite. However, most customers rarely use it.

At the moment, it is working quite well. Version nine's stability was not good. Now, it is stable again.

The scalability is very good.

Mostly, we get a standard answer. Sometimes, the support is not very good.

Maybe it is problem with some customers and the tickets that they are opening, as the tickets are not very well designed. Still, as an experienced user, when I open a ticket, I put in all the needed information. Yet, the support for me is still not great and could be better.

It is straightforward for me. Those new to this business find the initial setup complex. 

It is a complex product, so you can't do the setup with a click.

It is a good product for solution automation.

We use it to automate our business.

While we have had some issues, it is mostly perfect. If it is set up, it is running.

It does its job.

Token-based authentication: Where we do not have to use a password, and can use tokens for authentication in other systems.

Apart from the new UI, it is very stable. The new UI feels unready. It makes your browsers crash.

The scalability is very good. We can scale it however we want. We have seen new add-ons, such as the event machine. There is always something to augment.

You have to improve your systems, but there are no seen limits. 

Sometimes, it is a bit hard get through the first level of support to the second level, then to the endpoint of the solution. Overall, it is a bit tricky.

Our migration from a previous system was not easy. However, when we did a new implementation that was easy.

I do not remember.

I recommend to try the product. Our competitors mostly use this product too.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: Getting things done better.

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 case is release automation. 

We did a PoC last month, and are planning on probably implementing the product.

We have seen a cost improvement from it.

It is a way to test the system from production, which is nice.

It is very difficult to migrate. We want to buy one package. The release automation should be in one package.

It is a stable product. 

It is a scalable product. It is a very strong instrument for job scaling.

The technical support has been good with quick responses. Their last response was for the product license. It was delivered within two days.

We were not previously using another solution.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

We did not evaluate anyone else.

It is a nice product. We have been looking for this type of product for many years.