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."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"
"The product has a very good triggering mechanism."
"I find the provisioning to be the most valuable."
"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 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."
"This solution is scalable."
"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."
"Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important."
"The File Watcher utility, cyclic jobs, and email alert notification are valuable."
"We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."
"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"We have a team called pro-mon and they monitor all the jobs for us. A single view for them makes it easy for them to monitor things."
"Most valuable feature would be the ability to detect and notify when a process has not completed successfully."
"It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration could improve by providing some visibility on how the workflows are progressing."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration is difficult to understand. It's not very user-friendly."
"Regarding scalability, the architecture does not allow you to add additional servers just able to use two application servers, so it's not scalable."
"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."
"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."
"When it comes to supporting cloud services, Control-M is a bit slow. We are not advancing with the technology because we don't have the modules that can interact or use the new application services provided by the cloud technologies."
"The infrastructure updates could use improvement. Some of the previous updates that we have run to get to version nineteen were troublesome. So, a more seamless upgrade path for the infrastructure components would be useful. I don't know if they have replaced that in version 20 or if version 20 has an easier path, but I would like to see the upgrade from one version to the next version be a little smoother."
"It can definitely expand promotions, so that a single job can be moved. Currently you can only promote a job by promoting the entire table."
"Control-M reporting is a bit of a pain point right now. Control-M doesn't have robust reporting. I would like to see better reporting options. I would like to be able to pull charts or statistics that look nicer. Right now, we can pull some data, but it is kind of choppy. It would be nicer to have enterprise-level reporting that you can present to managers."
"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."
"The history module only contains a maximum of 10 days, but we would like to have access to more. For example, it would be helpful to have 30 days or two months of history available."
"The unifying features between Control-M for different platforms needs improvement. The scheduling options on the Control-M mainframe jobs are different than they are on our Linux server. There are a few differences here and there."
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.
