Endevor vs Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) comparison

Broadcom and Rocket Software are both solutions in the Software Configuration Management category. Broadcom is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.4, while Rocket Software is ranked #6. Broadcom holds a 33.9% mindshare in SCM, compared to Rocket Software’s 7.0% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Rocket Software users who would recommend it.

Endevor

Read 45 Endevor reviews

1,966 Views
1,205 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Read 3 Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) reviews

539 Views
247 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Endevor

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Endevor and Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Software Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 816,406 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Endevor

Ranking in Software Configuration Management

1st

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mainframe Application Development (3rd)

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Ranking in Software Configuration Management

6th

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 33.9%, up from 31.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 7.0%, up from 6.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Configuration Management

Featured Reviews

Efrén Yanez

Security Manager & CM Specialist & Mainframe Specialist en eSoft at eSoft 2006

Good analysis and integrations with helpful automation

If I had to comment on an area of improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes. It is actually a fairly complete product. It is robust with a solid history and is always growing in functionality. It has a high level of maturity, which benefits the users and the administrators. This tool, with its group of options, facilitates the integration with other business processes, which allows you to take advantage of other solutions by incorporating automatic functions.

Read full review

reviewer1441137

Compliance Manager at a hospitality company with 10,001+ employees

It simplifies things and has tight security but needs better technical support and a few enhancements

As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"We have been able to replicate entire SDLCs for new clients and have them loaded and ready to use Endevor in as little as one week. This was possible with the use of Endevor variables within the processors, so that a single processor was able to function for multiple systems across the entire SDLC."

"The tools are specifically designed for mainframe environments, providing features tailored to the unique requirements of the systems, ensuring there are no mistakes."

"We backup people's source code for them."

"It was an easy install. Since it was all set up, it pretty much runs itself now."

"It puts all our source in one product. We know where to go to gather all our source code and which source is associated with which executable. It's a one-stop-shop, one place to go for everything."

"The developers can very easily see what has changed on a particular piece of source code or a program, and others can look at that as well so they can coordinate their changes. It makes it much easier to promote a piece of code up to production."

"It's very flexible. A new technology comes along, this can be multiplied to handle the new technology quite easily."

"Having something that is out-of-the-box that you can customize to suit your organization's needs is huge."

More Endevor pros

"Scalability is great. It has absolutely met every need for us so far. We do have some concurrent development paths and we're able to flexibly assign variables. At the same time, our skeletons assemble where we want them to, so the scalability is very good."

"We audit once a year for our ChangeMan access, accurate financial programs, and all of that. Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it. Our internal auditors, external auditors, and SOX editors love this solution. We're in the healthcare business, so HIPAA regulations and all such things are a big deal, and this makes all that really simple."

Cons

"The scalability of Endevor could improve."

"Interfacing with some change control products that are not CA's, it's a little glitchy on the approvals of changes. It requires special needs for the users for approvals."

"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."

"One feature of Endevor is its Backout feature. If there is a problem, it can back out the executables. The only problem with that is that it will not back out the source in Endevor. For example, you can do a back out and it will back out the executable to the previous version, but it doesn't back out the source version in Endevor. It would make it much better if when you did a back out of Endevor, it would back out both the source and the executable and keep them in sync."

"They need to ditch the Eclipse plugin and just make the development environment for Z the standard Eclipse interface."

"If I had to comment on an area of improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes."

"Needs more audit capability when it comes to changes to settings that are made by administrators, as many of these are done through the panels and are therefore not logged as an action against a configuration item."

"It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up."

More Endevor cons

"As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful."

"I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's worth the value. The pricing is fairly good, justifiable for the return on investment."

"The solution is very expensive."

"The product is expensive."

"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."

"It's competitively priced and, as far as I know, it's just an enterprise license. We have found it is worth the money."

"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features."

"It's on a yearly basis. I am not aware of any additional costs."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

32%

Computer Software Company

22%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

32%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Insurance Company

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Endevor?

Endevor is easy to use.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Endevor?

The product’s implementation process is complicated and restrictive. It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up, at lea...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Endevor?

We use the product as a source manager and program manager. It helps in controlling the mainframe code and performing data migrations.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

BMC Compuware ISPW vs Endevor

Compared 79% of the time

CA Harvest Software Change Manager vs Endevor

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Rational ClearCase vs Endevor

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs Endevor

Compared 4% of the time

More Endevor Competitors

BMC Compuware ISPW vs Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

Compared 36% of the time

More Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Endevor

November 2024

Download Endevor product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Configuration Management

October 2024

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) report

Download Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) product report

Also Known As

CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Endevor Software Change Manager, CA Software Change Manager for Mainframe, CA Endevor SCM

Open Text, Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF

Learn More

Broadcom

Rocket Software

Overview

Endevor is a robust tool for managing source code, coordinating unit and system tests, controlling lifecycle and version of mainframe applications, and automating compilation processes. It ensures source-executable code integrity and tracks software promotions and sales operations.

Endevor offers stability, ease of use, and comprehensive management for mainframe code control and data migrations. Key features include customization capabilities, controlled access to source management, and integration within Enterprise DevOps. Tools like ACM Component Monitor, Bridge for Git, and modern web services support dynamic environments and parallel development efforts while custom JCLs/PROCs ensure validation of standard names. However, improvements are needed in integration with other products, particularly Zowe, and enhanced scalability and parallel development support.

What are Endevor's key features?

Customization: Tailored JCLs/PROCs for environment-specific needs
ACM Component Monitor: Monitors and manages application components efficiently
Bridge for Git: Facilitates integration with Git repositories
Enterprise DevOps Integration: Ensures seamless DevOps workflows
Parallel Development Support: Allows multiple development streams
Modern Web Services: Supports dynamic environments

What benefits should users look for in the reviews?

Stability: Reliable performance in managing mainframe applications
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface for efficient management
Comprehensive Management: End-to-end control of code and data migrations
Security: Ensures the integrity and security of source code
Controlled Access: Granular access control for source management

Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and retail rely on Endevor to streamline their mainframe application development. The tool aids in complying with strict regulatory requirements by providing audit and security functionalities. The complex setup and implementation process are offset by the significant efficiencies gained in a controlled and secure development environment.

Change management solutions that tackle the complexity of developing, deploying and maintaining software applications.

Sample Customers

Blue Hill Data Services Inc.

SPTS Technologies, Generali France, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH), Kutxa-Vital-Banco Madrid, Space and Naval Warfare Information Technology Center (SPAWAR ITC)

Buyer's Guide

Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

October 2024

Free Report: Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

Find out what your peers are saying about Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) report.

See our list of best Software Configuration Management vendors.

We monitor all Software Configuration Management 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.