JAMS Reviews

We use Fortra's JAMS to schedule jobs.

JAMS agents are instrumental in supporting our growth and scalability.

We have been using JAMS for eight years, and the majority of its benefits were realized early on. However, it remains a valuable scheduling software that consolidates our over 500 jobs into a single platform. JAMS allows us to clearly organize our tasks for the data warehouse, web, and other applications. While we could run these jobs independently, JAMS provides a structured approach that simplifies management and reduces manual overhead.

JAMS helps centralize job management on all of our platforms and applications. This is crucial, and it is the reason we still use JAMS.

JAMS has enabled the IT team to allocate more time to other tasks. Without JAMS, job automation would consume significantly more of our resources.

JAMS has also helped us free up a moderate amount of time by making it easier to troubleshoot stalled jobs.

The dashboard is intuitive.

The error messages from JAMS need clarification, hindering our ability to resolve issues swiftly.

The JAMS client requires attention. Its behavior can be erratic, and certain features lack intuitiveness. For instance, the search function, while powerful, is not user-friendly and can be challenging to master. The overall user interface also needs refinement.

The JAMS report viewer can be improved and needs a lot of work.

We have been using Fortra's JAMS for eight years.

The upgraded JAMS system has significantly improved stability compared to its previous versions. Before the upgrade (last year), we were experiencing frequent issues due to the system's age. However, since the update, performance has been much more reliable.

It scales very well

The technical support response time is good but the quality of the response varies.

Positive

In my previous organization, we used Jenkins, a powerful continuous integration and continuous delivery tool. While I cannot definitively compare it to JAMS, I found Jenkins' user-friendly interface and extensive integrations with various backend systems significantly streamlined our development processes. Unfortunately, my experience with Fortra's licensing and sales practices was less favourable. I have concerns about the company's integrity, particularly following their recent changes to our licensing arrangement, which seemed to be implemented in bad faith. Such actions raise questions about their trustworthiness and future intentions, leaving me uncertain about what to expect from them.

In our complex environment, the initial setup for someone with no JAMS experience would be difficult, but it would be straightforward in a simple environment.

When we upgraded JAMS last year, we purchased the consulting services from Help Systems.The consultant assigned to us was excellent.

Fortra's JAMS pricing structure has deteriorated significantly since its acquisition by Fortra. Previously, both Help Systems and MVP offered more favorable pricing and licensing terms. However, Fortra's current pricing and licensing practices are unnecessarily complicated far less customer friendly. In addition to standard licensing fees, numerous additional costs are associated with using JAMS. Fortra's approach of charging for seemingly minor components, such as separate agents and schedulers, is frustrating and adds to the overall cost of ownership.

I would give Fortra's JAMS a rating of five out of ten. While the software is excellent, my experience with the company could have been better. As a result, I would not consider purchasing any other Fortra products in the future.

We have two JAMS users in our organization.

JAMS is a technically powerful tool, but it has a learning curve for new users. It's crucial to understand the user interface and how agents communicate with the back-end system. Before connecting JAMS to other applications, it's important to familiarize yourself with its capabilities. For example, some scripts can be executed directly within JAMS, allowing you to create jobs using JAMS' features before relying on external scripts. However, debugging failed JAMS jobs can be time-consuming due to the complexity of the logs. Once you've mastered it, JAMS functions effectively, though the licensing structure is a notable caveat.

We exchange files on a nightly basis with vendors.

 The ability to protect the data we exchange against cybersecurity threats varies depending on the type of data being exchanged. 

We have a student information system (SIS) for education. We have 50 school districts that run on the same database, and they all can run reports through the GUI. JAMS manages the reports. We have a throttle so that they don't overpower the system. So, the stuff comes through the system and the throttle manages it, and then if there's a certain report that runs over, we can kill it. They can run it again with better parameters. That's pretty much the main use. We have a lot of nighttime jobs that we schedule through that as well.

It's deployed on our private cloud. We run our own server. In terms of its version, we're on the most recent version.

If JAMS has a deadlock, we get a notification. When there's a deadlock, it'll kill the job. If something runs too long, it kills it. We also have a throttle, which also helps the whole system to work. If we didn't have the throttle, it would be bedlam. It would be crazy. 

It absolutely helps to eliminate data slack across the applications. It'll kill jobs; it'll kill deadlocks faster; and it'll kill long-running queries. We can get in there, and where the software doesn't allow us to kill the job, we can get into the SQL Server, but JAMS is much cleaner, and more people can get into it without having to expose the database access to people. We can give them JAMS access where they can kill the job.

It saves time when troubleshooting stalled jobs because of the fact that more people can get into it without having the access to the backend. 

It has 100% helped to free up the IT staff’s time. Previously, there used to be two or three of us for monitoring, but now, we've boiled it down just to me. I get the notifications, and I handle them. It has absolutely reduced staff time.

The overall product is fantastic. I love it. It has been a fantastic, solid product. If I have one tiny bit of a problem with it, the support team gets in touch with me right away. I don't know if I've had another service that has been as fantastic as the JAMS support team. 

I would like a simple web interface that I could give to my team to go in and kill jobs or see why jobs died so that we don't have to drill down deeper into the application and know everything about it. It would be good to have a really clean web engine that would say here are the jobs running.  We can then click to see the time running and whether any of them fails and other similar things. I know they have one, but it's not very simplistic. It would be awesome to have a simple one. 

I have been using this solution for about 15 years.

It's 110% rock solid. JAMS has never failed us. It has been rock solid.

We only use it for one thing. I don't have any input on its scalability because we don't use it for anything else. We only use it on one platform. So, there's no centralization. We have one main application. It has the front end, the back end, the middleware, and all that jazz. All the jobs to maintain the software are run through JAMS.

We probably use the simplest features of JAMS. We have no complex code-driven things.

I would rate them a 10 out of 10. They get back to you faster than your mom will call you back. When we've had problems, such as if I've had a job that keeps on failing and then I say, "Here's the error code, and I don't know why it's failing," they're right back. They are fantastic. Although I haven't contacted them in probably a year, when we first started up, our software code was sketchy or a little weak, and it failed. JAMS was right there when we had problems with scheduling things. They were fantastic. Their support is amazing. The product is solid. It's as solid as it can be.

Positive

JAMS was our first and only one. I know they did a lot of research on it, and they picked JAMS. The whole state uses it. They picked it, and we didn't know. We didn't come from anybody, and we aren't going to anybody, that's for sure.

I've installed it many times. It's simple as a pie. With a few clicks, you are done. It gets done as fast as you can click. It's very simple. As long as you have all the parameters, a database, and your web front end, it's super easy.

Our licensing is pretty cheap because we have a state solution. So, we pay only $1,000 a year. 

We're a software provider for school systems. We are state-owned. There are 13 of us throughout Ohio, and we have a collective agreement with JAMS or a collective licensing through JAMS. Because we have so many licenses, we get a discount on the renewal, etc.

I would absolutely recommend it to anybody. If you don't give it a try, you're a fool. At least give it a try because you'll find that it's an easy install. It's an incredibly easy management tool to go around. The setup wizards are nice. It's a little slow on some of the history look-ups, and I don't know why. Other than that, it's very clean with a good front end and easy manageability.

In terms of helping us to be aware of and handle common issues that can prevent our jobs from running, we haven't had anything. It will kill a job if there's a deadlock, and obviously, we get notifications if there are bad parameters in the job run, but I don't have any notifications about not running because of permissions, low resources, or anything like that. We don't have that kind of thing set up.

I would easily rate it a 10 out of 10. With the stability and the support, to me, every day, it's a 10.

We use Fortra's JAMS for scheduled tasks. We have over 100 virtual servers, and JAMS allows us to manage scheduled tasks from a single location. This means that we can create jobs and run them on any of those 100 servers. For example, we can create one job to reboot a specific server at a specific time, or we can create a job to reboot multiple servers at the same time. Once the reboot is complete, we can create chain jobs to kick off other steps, such as running a script or sending an email notification.

We have not had many problems with Fortra's JAMS. I think most of the issues have been due to trial and error. A lot of it depends on us, the users, to make sure our code is correct when we create commands. We need to make sure that all of the information is accurate. We have to double- and triple-check our code to ensure there are no issues that will prevent jobs from running.

Fortra's JAMS helps make our lives easier by allowing us to automate tasks.

Fortra's JAMS helps us centralize the management of all our platforms and applications. This is important because it allows us to manage all of our systems from a single location. Previously, we had over 100 virtual servers, each with its own set of scheduled tasks. This meant that we had to log in to each server individually to view and manage the tasks. With JAMS, we can simply open the client and view all of our jobs in one place. This saves us a lot of time and effort.

JAMS' code-driven automation is highly effective in handling more complex scheduling environments.

JAMS saves us an hour of time when troubleshooting stalled jobs. 

JAMS helps to free up our IT staff's time.

Being able to create a series of chained jobs, which are basically linked jobs is valuable. This means that we can schedule a server restart at 2 a.m. Once the restart is complete, we can have the job trigger another job that will send us an email notification. Then, we can have that job trigger another job that runs some SQL statements or Power BI queries. We can continue to chain jobs together in this way.

As an admin, I would like to have a web-based GUI instead of a client application that we have to install on our PCs. Many applications are moving to web-based GUIs, so it would be convenient if we could use JAMS without having to install a client on our machines. We could simply go to our local servers or website and manage everything from there.

I have been using Fortra's JAMS for almost three years.

We have not had any problems with JAMS. It has never crashed for us. If we have any issues, it is because of some of our PowerShell code or another error.

JAMS is highly scalable and could be used for a lot more than what we are currently using it for. We just haven't had the time to invest in it to actually use it properly.

The technical support has been excellent. They have always responded promptly and in a timely manner. We have never had to wait for answers.

Positive

We previously used the built-in Windows task scheduler before migrating the jobs into JAMS.

The initial setup was really straightforward and easy. I didn't run into any problems from a setup point of view. 

One person was required for the deployment.

We completed the implementation ourselves in-house with some clarification about some settings from JAMS.

We have seen a return on investment with Fortra's JAMS.

The pricing of JAMS has not been an issue for us, as it has allowed us to save time. This makes it a cost-effective product.

I would rate Fortra's JAMS nine out of ten.

Five people are using JAMS in our organization.

Fortra's JAMS is a great cost-effective solution for automating daily tasks, such as rebooting a server, running PowerShell commands, executing SQL queries, and generating SQL statements. It can do virtually anything.

We started with basic tasks because we were bringing things over from Windows Task Scheduler. We didn't have a whole lot of dependencies at that point. We have gotten much more detailed in our scheduling requirements since. We use what are currently called JAMS Setups, which in the new version are called Sequence Jobs, quite a bit, especially for our enterprise data analytics team. We do some pretty complex scheduling scenarios.

We also use it for holiday calendars that impact our scheduling and for multiple regular scenarios, such as dependencies on a file or another job or another Setup. 

Overall, we use it for basic, normal enterprise-scheduling solutions.

We've been able to automate a lot of processes that were done manually before. We're not a huge company, and we're a fairly new company, so a lot of things were being done before in Task Scheduler or in a homegrown solution called Batch Nucleus. They were also in cron and in SaaS. They were all over the place. Being able to consolidate all of that into this one enterprise scheduling solution allows us to put dependencies on different jobs between different systems. It also allows us to monitor everything from one place and gives us the ability to do some exception handling. We have unlimited licensing with JAMS and we have hundreds of environments that we have agents on and do testing on. Having one location that we can monitor everything from, and handle all the exceptions from, is critical.

We've automated our critical processes, which used to be done manually through an external product and that means we don't have to worry quite so much about manual, human error.

Because we have gone from a lot of manual processes to automated processes with JAMS, we have been able to free up IT staff time. We're not spending 30 minutes doing something manually that JAMS can do in five minutes. It has freed up IT resources, but it has also sped up our processing times. For just the Technical Operations Center team that I manage, it has saved about 20 hours a week.

JAMS has also helped eliminate “data slack” across our applications. All of our enterprise data analytics is done through JAMS, so being able to access things like Teradata, Hadoop, and Snowflake cloud solutions for data integration is important. Our company is based on data. Everything we do is data-driven, so it has been very valuable having one place where we can process all of the data and do batch schedules with chunks of data. It's been a good tool for that. Having current data ready to go when our users need it is extremely critical because we are a FinTech company. We have to be able to pull data instantaneously to make decisions. Otherwise, our customer base is reduced and there are also compliance issues. We have both financial and legal obligations to our partner companies, so that data has to be up-to-date and ready to go when they request it.

I've used a lot of the other scheduling packages in the past. The most valuable feature of JAMS is the ease of being able to update parameters on-the-fly. Also, their monitoring and historical views are pretty robust.

We are also able to go into a job that is inside of a Setup and say, "Turn this one off for a while," by using the Except clause.

Another useful functionality is being able to pass parameters and variables between different jobs, and different steps in a job, or a Setup.

JAMS handles exceptions fairly well but there are some areas where it might improve a little bit. It has to do with being able to automatically handle exceptions, out-of-the-box, rather than having to code them. I'd also like to be able to do different things, based on what the actual exception is. In our current version, there's a placeholder where you should be able to do some things along those lines, but we've never actually been able to get it to work. I've seen in the 7.x versions that that has been fixed.

In terms of automation, there are some scenarios that we're still working on trying to automate and we just haven't been able to find an applicable solution through JAMS for those yet. I'm excited to see, once we get to that point, if we can do those things in the newer version.

I started using JAMS in June of 2016. I was in charge of taking all of our disparate scheduling systems and converting everything into the JAMS scheduling package. I have used it from the ground up.

Right now we're on-prem, but we are going to want to go to the cloud sometime next year.

In the five years that I have worked on JAMS, I have never had it crash.

The fat client on your machine, for the 6.5 version, is not really reliable. It can slow down and it can get hung and you have to restart it. But with JAMS itself, the only issues we've had were when we didn't get the license key updated on time. For the most part, JAMS has been a very steady, reliable tool.

Because we have unlimited licensing, it has been extremely scalable for us. We can put agents on whatever servers and environments that we need to, fairly quickly and easily. We now have that set up as an automated process. So it's extremely scalable, based on the pricing model and how many agents you're allowed.

Technical support is an area in which JAMS has come a long way. When I first started with them, they didn't have any kind of training. The way it worked was that if we had a question, we would call their support team and there might be some back-and-forth trying to figure out how to get what we needed. But they now have JAMS University where you can go to a boot camp and learn more about the product. 

And their support is pretty good and pretty responsive. They get back to you fairly quickly and they usually have a good solution to whatever your issue is. And while they have generally been responsive, there have been several times when getting an answer has taken several weeks, instead of being able to get a really quick answer. I would rate JAMS support at seven out of 10, but I wouldn't give more than an eight for the support for any product that I've worked with. That makes a seven a high mark, for me.

Neutral

We spun off from another company, and that other company used Control-M. When we went our own way, we didn't bring Control-M with us. The scheduling solutions that we were using before were Task Scheduler, a homegrown solution, and SQL Server Agent jobs, things that aren't necessarily true enterprise scheduling solutions.

In our migration to JAMS, we had to refactor some of the code, but that's because of the way that it was coded before. SQL Server Agent and Task Scheduler were pretty easy to migrate because there is actually a conversion routine where you can log in to a machine from JAMS and just say, "Go pull the job and convert it." It would automatically convert it, and we would just have to do some cleanup. That part was easy. But when it came to some of our other stuff, we pretty much had to build it from scratch.

I was the only person working on the migration back then, so it took about a year and a half to get everything over, but a lot of that was because we were having to go find things that were being scheduled on these other boxes. Some 80 percent of it was done within the first four to six months.

JAMS is close to the lower end of the pricing models for enterprise scheduling solutions. They are much cheaper than Control-M, as well as some other products that I've used.

I also don't know of another solution where you can actually get true, unlimited licensing, where you can have as many instances and as many agents as you want. That has been a godsend for us because we have environments that we spin up and take down on-demand. There are times when we have hundreds of environments going at one time. Having that lower-cost model has been really good for us, while still being able to get the functionality that we need from the tool.

Maintenance and additional features are all included in the yearly cost, and that cost is still much cheaper than what you would pay for maintenance for another product.

The one that I had used most recently, and the longest, was BMC Control-M. It is an extremely robust product that has the ability to do some things that our current version of JAMS cannot do. For example, Control-M has the ability to truly diagram out what the flow looks like, from within the tool. My understanding, after having talked to my scheduling analyst, is that that feature is coming up in a future version of JAMS, which is cool.

Control-M also has the ability to do batch impact analysis, and to put a job at the end of a job flow that says that if anything in the job flow breaks, provide an alert. JAMS has the functionality to do that in the current version, but you have to code it. If you want to say, "If this job fails, I want this other job to run to fix it, and then come back and do this other job," you have to code it. But I believe, again, in the newer versions, it's easier to do that type of flow by using Sequence Jobs. That's the biggest area where I felt JAMS really needed to improve, in automatically handling issues, and they've come a long way.

Control-M enables you to send different types of notifications based on the output, which is also a feature that's coming up in the 7.0 version of JAMS.

JAMS has taken quite a few of the recommendations that we gave them and has built them into their newer versions of JAMS. It has been an exciting journey for us to be able to have a lot of input into how the product works.

I'm really excited that we're trying to upgrade to the 7.x version, because it's so much better. But it's a huge change to go from the 6.0 version to the 7.0 version. The tool looks completely different. It works differently, with different ways to do things, so there is a big learning curve. Since our developers build their own jobs in the lower-level environments, it's going to be a big learning curve for our entire company to start using the most current version.

We've defined our complex scheduling scenarios the way that JAMS works in our current version, but in the future version that's going to be much easier. That version has the ability to create multiple schedules on the same job, instead of having multiple jobs with different schedules doing the same thing.

In terms of the upgrade process, we have multiple instances, including development, stage, and production. We've been trying to build a test environment and we have been doing a lot of our tests there. For our actual cut-over and conversion to the newest version, we are being told that we can actually upgrade in-place, instead of having to do a conversion of our database. We're going to take a two- to three-week freeze on any scheduling updates and on adding anything new. Then we'll convert our development instance and train all of our developers on how to use it and what the differences are. We'll let them test. Then we'll upgrade our stage environment and let them test on that. As soon as all of that looks good, we'll do an upgrade of our production system.

We will be working with HelpSystems on the upgrade when we get a little bit closer to it. At this point we're still trying to figure out exactly when we're going to be able to do it. But we have asked them multiple questions and gotten a lot of good feedback from them.

In terms of saving time when troubleshooting stalled jobs, JAMS could do that. But we don't have all of our code set to send the output from a job back to JAMS. So in a lot of instances, we're still having to dig into the system, like Informatica, to get that log back and find out what's wrong. That is something that we, as a company, need to improve. It's not a lack of functionality on the part of JAMS.

We run application software for auto finance companies, banks, and the auto company's financial departments. We use JAMS to schedule all the nightly and repetitive batch processing. We run around 10,000 jobs per day.

We've had batch schedulers before. We’ve had CA7 on the mainframe. Our on-premise data center had another product. They were a little more cryptic and not as intuitive to look at. We couldn’t figure out what to do. In JAMS, we can figure out whatever we need to do pretty easily. It has a really good user interface and straightforward scheduling functionality.

JAMS is easy to use. We came up with various scenarios for scheduling. With a little bit of thought, we figured it out and implemented it pretty simply. Calendars, building new jobs, and crisscrossing dependencies are easy to update. If something fails, we can rerun it or skip it with just a couple of mouse clicks. The information displayed on the monitor is very informative. I have a team of 24/7 operators. The team members watch it run and make sure everything's on time. If anything fails, they address it. The product is pretty good for them. It’s pretty easy. I like the solution overall.

The product does not allow the users to cut and paste the job names from the screen.

I have been using the solution for three to four years.

I haven’t experienced any stability issues in the solution.

We're running ten thousand jobs and haven't had any capacity issues. We don’t have it on the busiest server. I'm sure we could run it on a larger server, and it would get even faster. However, it seems to be doing well, and we keep adding to it every day. The operations staff are the users.

I had an amazing experience with the technical support team. The team members respond right away. They answer the phone usually without going into a queue. Their support is amazing. That is one of the key reasons why we selected JAMS.

Positive

We were using AutoSys on-premise. We didn't really do a full POC. Once we had the demos and compared the features, we decided to go with JAMS. Since it was the first thing we were doing in the cloud, the testing was like a POC. The whole environment was brand new.

The migration wasn’t difficult. We have documentation on all our jobs. It was just a matter of building them out. Once we finish a few jobs, we can clone what we've done and make minor tweaks for the next one. It's pretty easy.

It took us a little less than three months to choose the product and start using it. There was a lot of discussion about how to build the firewalls between servers and get access to the servers that we would put the agents on. All of that was new to us. It took us a little bit longer than someone who already has that established and is just swapping one tool for the other.

Everything is in the Azure cloud. We have three instances. One instance is for DR, one for prod, and one for non-prod. Lewis Diaz helped us get going when we first went live, did training, and helped us talk about how we had it built. From there on out, we've been self-sufficient.

We had all our clients in an on-premise data center in Atlanta, and we started with our first client in the Azure cloud. We built them out, and they went live in April 2020. Little by little, we kept bringing clients from on-premise to the cloud. We were ready to go in less than three months. It probably could have been done sooner, but the migration and coordination with our clients took a lot of time.

One of the support persons from JAMS had come to our organization. He gave us a three-day training and reviewed what we had built. He gave us suggestions on how to do things better. We have one main person who is an administrator. Another person and I are a backup to the administrator. I am a manager. It doesn’t take a lot of people to maintain the product.

The product is giving us a lot of value for the money we're paying.

For what it does, the product is priced very well.

We evaluated AutoSys, but we weren't thrilled with it. However, we included it in the comparison to consider the pros and cons. Security was a key concern.

JAMS servers run our main software, and agents are installed on separate servers where our code runs. The license came with five agents out of the box when we bought the license. It was plenty. We're balancing our load across three servers right now. We had another office in Buffalo with just a handful of jobs we set up. It will run there until we can get those into the cloud, too. We're not even using all five.

It's pretty easy to set up a new agent. Most of the workaround is related to firewalls, getting access, and security. Once it's up, we can run things in that environment. We watch for capacity on the servers that we have the agents on. We're running a ton of stuff currently, but we haven't had any real issues where servers hit high CPU or memory. Performance has been good. We use JAMS only for traditional batch-type operations.

We have alerts for long-running jobs and jobs that could not even start. It's error handling. It has different levels of errors, like informational errors and critical errors. We can mix and match and set up emails to be sent to our team according to the alerts. The tool's alerting capability is pretty good.

The solution has an alerting feature to let us know about exceptions. We've even been able to set up what actions it has to take in different scenarios. It's great.

We're using the product to centralize the management of jobs on all our platforms and applications. We're about ninety percent there. It is important to our organization, especially from an employee standpoint. We need one tool that everybody can be trained on and know about. Having multiple tools across different platforms and having people learn more than one thing is troublesome.

In some of the really difficult situations regarding scheduling and everything, we were able to put something in and get it to work with just a little thought. We did not have to spend too much time on it. It was pretty easy. I like the integration with PowerShell. We use PowerShell a lot. If we're supposed to get ten transactions a day, and we only got five, we run a PowerShell job that checks that count once an hour. If the hourly count is under five, then we fail the job. We use it a lot for monitoring our applications.

We have tons of file transmissions, but we use a different product. JAMS has a really good file watch feature that we utilize all the time. The job runs as soon as the file arrives and does whatever it needs to do with the data. Then, it's available for the business to do what it needs to do.

JAMS helps save time when troubleshooting stalled jobs. The job log is easy to access. We can get that to our programmers if needed. There are many screens showing the job name, but we can't cut and paste it. I'd love to be able to cut and paste the job name from anywhere it shows. It will help us send it to our developers without going elsewhere to find or type it out.

We upgrade every two years to the current version. It's a lot of effort for us to upgrade our products or tools. That's why we're on a two-year rotation unless a major security update would come out. Then, we'd have to upgrade right away.

The product hasn't eliminated the monitoring tools but has augmented them. We only use Azure Monitor. We don't spend a lot of money on monitoring tools. Azure Monitor is included with our Microsoft Azure license. Most of our stuff is set up around that. Our jobs are set up in JAMS. It scans the Azure logs for certain buzzwords. It's all mandated. It's never going to make it go away.

Everything we run in prod, we run in non-prod ten times more because we have ten test environments. We've always had that with whatever product we had. It does help. The developers don't have to manually run a thousand test jobs in a release. However, we always had that configured no matter what product we had.

People looking to buy the solution must get somebody to come out and do the demo. Everybody is very knowledgeable and very professional. They know their product. They're definitely great ambassadors. They put on a good show, and then they stick to it. They back it up with reality.

Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We use JAMS for file transfer, but instead of using JAMS file transfer, we have a script, a CMD file, which we schedule and configure to use either WinSCP or Ipswitch WS_FTP Professional. It will use either of those to send and receive files. We use it for scheduling file transfers.

It's deployed on AWS.

JAMS saves us on the order of thousands of hours per year.

I can create new jobs and schedule them based on time, based on a file trigger, or based on an email trigger. I'm happy with all those abilities.

The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful.

One issue which can prevent jobs from running is when a script gets into a loop. Suppose, using WinSCP, that the script connects to a particular vendor but that vendor has changed its server security key. I have to manually accept the new key so that it trusts the new server. Until that happens, the job will be stuck. It retries without end. JAMS will not kill it, even if it is running for, say, four days. We will only realize there's an issue on Sunday when there is a reboot for all the Windows servers, including JAMS. The reboot will kill any hung threads, and then we know something was stuck for days.

I think there is a way to configure JAMS so that if a job is running for so long it will shoot out an email saying, "This job is still running." I pinged support about it a long time ago and they said something like that to me, but I have not been able to configure it yet.

Also, I'm not sure if they have fixed it in a newer version, but there is no global search in the version I have. If I have multiple sub-folders that are named for business units, like HR or IT, and I have to search for a job, I cannot search from the top. I have to go to the HR folder to search for a particular job, or to the IT folder. It would be good to have a global search, where I could search from the top, rather than having to go into sub-folders.

I've been using HelpSystems JAMS for more than a year now. I'm the only admin for PSEG.

I'm exploring JAMS as we go. I'm trying to find more time so that I can explore all the other options it has, such as SAP connectors, so that I can suggest solutions we can use.

We have used their tech support a few times and they were very good each time. They were very responsive and very quick.

Positive

This solution replaced another tool we had before, called Apps15, which crashed one day. We migrated whatever we were doing there, all the CMD scripts, to this. Once we switched, we liked it and it has become one of our very important utilities for all the file transfers between our company and its vendors. We use it for multiple file transfers every day, whenever there is a financial transaction with many files created by SAP and other applications.

It saves us time and it is not an expensive solution for what we are doing. 

Maybe in the future, when we integrate with SAP and other tools, it might be a little costly, but it's still a very cost-effective solution. It's very good.

There is an application called Maestro, but that is built into SAP. In comparison, this is a comparatively very simple and smooth application that takes less time to configure. Maestro and XI are for internal transfers only, while JAMS is the main, approved solution for doing external file transfers. It is our enterprise file transfer tool.

It's a nice tool for scheduling, but make sure you are familiar with all the connectors. It can connect to and integrate with multiple applications. We have the SAP Job Scheduling Service doing its work, but JAMS can also do the SAP portion. Instead of having multiple tools, if you look at all the features that JAMS has, it might be able to replace the other tools so that you just use one.

It's a very good solution. Even my director was very happy with it.

Our primary use case is for batch automation. We don't use the RPA product. We use the scheduling agents that can run on other machines so that when the scheduler kicks off the job, it can run either on the main JAMS server or it can run on an agent box.

We do have some interactive jobs that interact with the desktop mainly in Excel, but that's not our preferred method. We want to be, as much as we can, a more structured batch. As far as interactive, we don't have folks that are interacting with the jobs. The jobs are built to run standalone. They may interact with the desktop or with the computer itself to run the job, but the users interact directly with the jobs.

JAMS has improved my organization by taking a myriad of manual processes and allowing us to automate them. It enables our folks to focus more on tasks that require their human intelligence and their creativity and less on just mundane tasks. It increases efficiency, accuracy, and consistency.

Over the past few years, JAMS has saved them at least 20% of their time. At least.

Its ability to centralize the management of jobs on all of our platforms and applications is a huge advantage. Before we used JAMS, there were pockets of what I would call semi-automation in different places and it was somewhat restricted and not very flexible. We were able to really combine a lot of the automations that were being done throughout the company, add a whole lot more, and all monitor it from the central JAMS console.

JAMS has helped eliminate monitoring tools. We do have some JAMS-related monitoring that goes on. We have jobs that we were having some difficulty with some connections and we implemented some jobs in JAMS that monitor those connections throughout the day. This helped us identify issues faster than some of our vendors which we would have expected to be able to identify those issues. We were able to identify them even faster and actually warn us of issues before they made an impact.

Batch scheduling and having a single pane of glass that we can track the success of all of our automations throughout the day are the most valuable features. 

JAMS is very good at helping to handle common nuisances preventing our ops from running. We set up warnings whenever a job is having trouble, and that allows us to address it before it becomes business impacting. JAMS support has always been very helpful in providing us any guidance on how to address issues.

We use their interactive agents. We use agents on a few machines. We have some automations that will run the first part and then wait for a user to release or run a second part. That is used frequently and is very useful, but we don't have a ton of straight-up interaction. We do have some users that interact with JAMS, to release jobs or kickoff new jobs after they've done their checks.

Running interactive tasks helps our users focus on their business processes. Running tasks out of JAMS really helps us to do more with less and rerun as a fairly lean organization. That helps us to maintain that leanness so that we can do more with less. Since adopting JAMS, we have been able to actually reduce staff in areas and not replace them, just because of attrition. We didn't lay people off but we didn't have to hire replacements because JAMS processes were helping.

I think JAMS has a very good engine for being able to identify exceptions. We're probably not using it to its fullest extent, but I think it has pretty good capabilities as far as handling exceptions and if a job fails, how to react to it. 

The code driven automation for helping us handle complex scheduling requirements has been great. We have somewhat complex scheduling that we need to do based on business and holiday schedules and running it on a certain business day of the month and that kind of thing, and it has been no sweat. The support at JAMS has been very helpful in helping us to use that effectively.

We are still using JAMS 6.5, so I don't really feel comfortable talking about room for improvement as much because we're still using a little bit of the older version. My understanding is that the newer version has some additional capabilities. One thing that I know that the JAMS people said that they were working on that would be huge for us is a search capability so that you could search for tasks.

It may be available in version 7 or in a future release of 7. I think that's on their roadmap. But right now, for us to do a search, we have to search through database queries.

I have been using JAMS for almost seven years. 

It's been rock solid. We haven't had JAMS have issues that weren't introduced by other products. It's been rock solid and we depend on it as a mission-critical system.

We have the ability to scale out using more agents on other agent machines so that we could run more jobs simultaneously. I don't think scalability has ever been a problem honestly. I don't know that we really push JAMS all that hard. A bigger company would probably push JAMS a lot harder than we do, but scalability from our perspective has never been an issue.

We run hundreds of jobs a day. We don't have a ton of users of JAMS, but I would say that JAMS benefits almost the entire company in its automation.

JAMS support is as near to perfect as we can get, so I would rate them a nine out of ten. They are the best support that we deal with of any of our vendors.

They help to save time when troubleshooting stalled jobs. They're great. They're responsive. They're always willing to jump in and help whenever they can. They're always very knowledgeable and engaging. We love JAMS' support. They've always been very good.

We used the Microsoft Windows Task Scheduler, but it wasn't anywhere near what JAMS is.

I had used Tidal before and I found JAMS more cost-effective and easier to use.

The bottom line for me in selecting JAMS was that it was cost-effective, it was not a hugely expensive product to purchase or maintain, and it did pretty much everything we needed it to do for what we were looking for. It has high capability and lower costs compared to its competitors, and that was the deciding factor for us.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. We have a relatively simple setup. So when we started out with JAMS, it was one JAMS server and we were running most of our jobs on that server. Then we grew with JAMS over the years and expanded it to other machines to run jobs because of the capabilities or the setups of those machines. That was all really pretty straightforward. If we ever ran into any questions or anything, JAMS support has been great.

We've been able to do more with less. In other words, we've either not had to increase staff in some cases, or when people left, we didn't replace them. We've been able to reduce staff. We didn't have layoffs, but when people left, we didn't replace them, and that was largely due to the automation efforts through JAMS.

If I had to do it all over again, I would probably use their professional services to kickstart things. We did a lot of self-training on JAMS, so we've learned a lot along the way, but if I had to do it over again, I would probably have used more of their training capabilities and maybe some of their professional services. My advice to anybody considering JAMS is to get started and because it really helps us a ton for that single pane of glass for managing automated processes.

I would rate JAMS a nine out of ten. 

We implement Fortra's JAMS for our clients, utilizing their existing scripts, batch jobs, and stored procedures. We define all batch jobs within JAMS, providing our clients with a single console to monitor and track the status of their running jobs.

Integrating JAMS into our existing IT infrastructure is a straightforward process. JAMS provides templates for common execution methods like command jobs, SQL jobs, and SSH jobs. We need to define the location of the jobs on the agent server and update their schedules based on our existing workflows.

Our clients have many departments, each with specialists for different tasks. Some manage SQL queries, others handle batch jobs, and others deal with ongoing jobs. This requires them to access various servers simply to check if jobs are running successfully. JAMS provides a single point of access, allowing them to monitor the status of all jobs from one location. This fosters shared knowledge among different departments. Previously, individuals might not know how to check the status of specific jobs, like SQL queries, leaving them in the dark about their success. JAMS empowers all IT personnel to view the status of any job, enabling them to track progress, identify errors, rerun jobs, and resolve critical issues.

We receive immediate notification of errors and can view them on the monitor. However, while the JAMS log reflects errors within the job itself, it often lacks the information needed to resolve them directly. As a result, we still rely on programmers or developers to interpret the logs and assist with troubleshooting. Nevertheless, the notification system provided by JAMS is a valuable tool.

JAMS helps us schedule jobs efficiently by notifying us of long-running jobs and allowing us to set jobs to run in sequence.

The JAMS central management console provides a convenient single point of access for monitoring all running jobs. This allows for clear visibility into job statuses, enabling clients to promptly address both successful jobs and those encountering errors.

JAMS helps eliminate data slack across our applications. We can react to errors so the data doesn't get stuck on the server.

JAMS helps cut troubleshooting time for stalled jobs by 50 percent. Logs stored on JAMS are based on the project's allocated budget. For troubleshooting, we can access the JAMS server. However, previously, resolving issues required accessing the server hosting the specific job and finding someone familiar with it. JAMS's primary strength lies in notifying users and pinpointing the error location within the job, streamlining the troubleshooting process.

JAMS helped eliminate the need for multiple monitoring tools. Since our clients no longer use task schedulers, there's less confusion; some people found the Windows scheduler difficult to understand. JAMS provides a user-friendly way to view job schedules. We provide an initial transfer to familiarize clients with the monitor's components. Now, with JAMS as a common tool, teams can easily understand each other's jobs, regardless of whether they're front-end or Windows scheduler-based. This is a significant improvement.

By using JAMS, IT personnel can focus on other tasks without needing to actively monitor their servers. When an error occurs, JAMS automatically notifies them via email or through the JAMS website, allowing them to address the issue promptly. This not only reduces the time IT personnel spend on monitoring, but also provides them with peace of mind knowing they'll be notified of any problems.

JAMS handles job dependencies and error recovery in our environment well.

While I appreciate the other features, the agent stands out for its ease of installation and configuration for JAMS monitoring. We can define thresholds to detect jobs running longer than usual and receive notifications when that occurs. Job monitoring is also a valuable feature for our clients.

While JAMS's cross-platform capabilities are good, my only concern is the need to download an ODBC driver to connect to specific databases. It would be highly beneficial if JAMS natively supported these connections, eliminating the need for separate driver downloads for each database.

With no programming experience, I find JAMS code-driven automation challenging due to the required PowerShell scripting. While JAMS offers helpful guides, the technical barrier remains significant.

I have been using Fortra's JAMS for three years.

JAMS has been stable with no bugs or major disruptions. I would rate the stability of JAMS nine out of ten.

Scaling JAMS is easy and user-friendly to do. Minimal configuration is required.

The technical support is good and quick to respond.

Positive

The initial deployment is straightforward, requiring only a few clicks and some data entry. It took two weeks and involved two IT personnel.

Our clients have experienced a return on investment by using JAMS, thanks to the improvements it has brought to their processes.

JAMS is priced competitively compared to similar solutions and offers flexible licensing options to cater to user needs.

I would rate Fortra's JAMS eight out of ten.

We have three JAMS users in our organization and over 50 in our client's organizations.

I particularly recommend JAMS to our clients in the financial industry. It offers valuable features for monitoring job execution, receiving error notifications, and integrating seamlessly with other applications.