We performed a comparison between Control-M and Oracle Process Cloud Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, BMC and others in Process Automation."The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools."
"If a job fails, that development team is notified right away, which improves reliability. Previously, it was on the operators to notify the developers that their job failed, erred, or aborted. Now, it's all automated."
"BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us."
"The solution has the power to reduce resources, which is good for business. It is constantly updated to remain compatible with new technologies such as Amazon, Azure, and Google Cloud. It's very easy to take advantage of the compatibilities."
"The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology."
"I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets."
"The reporting is top-notch. I haven't found any other applications on the market that can replicate what Control-M offers. The alerting is very good, and I think their service monitoring is the best in the industry."
"It has multiple features. You can plan your execution in Control-M. It provides one single window where you can define workflows regardless of geographic boundaries and platforms. A batch process can be executed from this single window. It provides insights into your processes. Your business people will know what process they are running and what is the state of the process. Instead of knowing that they're not going to meet the SLA the next morning, the business people immediately know the changes in their process. Control-M is very easy. I can tell a non-technical person that this is how it works, and he would be able to easily understand it. Business people can understand the methodology of Control-M and the intuitive features that it has. It has a fantastic graphical user interface and is easy to understand. You just have to drag and drop but in a very intuitive way. Monitoring features are also good. It has different color coding schemes, which can help you to understand the status of your workflow. An operator who is not that technical and is just monitoring the status of the application can see by color-coding the status of a process. If anything goes wrong or a process is stuck, it gives you a hint. You can just right-click and see the logs and the output. Even if the system is not right there in the data center and is located somewhere else, you can monitor it right from there and see the workflows."
"The tool's most valuable feature is knowing the KPIs and SLAs. This means you can see who's responsible for approving or rejecting requests. You'll know which employees are slow to take action, so you can see who's being lazy. You get a report at the month's or year's end to see how active employees are and if they support the system. This helps make things faster and easier for everyone. Tracking activity is the main point, so you can see how employees use the system."
"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility."
"Some reports on the UI require some improvement since the UI is not so impressive."
"The initial setup was complex, because I wasn't used to it."
"I am unsure if Control-M is compliant with Microsoft Azure environment integrations. We have some clients in Azure environments. Specifically, in Canada, government agencies and nonprofits mostly use Microsoft Azure."
"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."
"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."
"With the current version update, I'm not sure why we needed a separate database upgrade. Why not put it all in one package? Previously, you could do it either via a manual upgrade or an in-place upgrade but it wasn't separate."
"The company has been working with BMC on the MFT. There are still some things about MFT which don't work the way that we want with our needs. So, we would like to see that improved."
"The tool was perfect on-prem, but issues cropped up when it transitioned to the cloud. Some features, such as event listeners, have been suspended or deprecated, causing inconvenience for users who relied on them for sending tasks via WhatsApp or SMS."
Control-M is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 111 reviews while Oracle Process Cloud Service is ranked 17th in Process Automation with 1 review. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Oracle Process Cloud Service is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Process Cloud Service writes "Helps to transform an organization from a paper-based system to a paperless one using a workflow engine". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Oracle Process Cloud Service is most compared with .
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.
