We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation and OpCon based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AutoSys Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ability to handle large workloads, its user-friendly interface, efficient performance, and constant availability. It excels in organizing tasks and initiating them, providing a live view of batch processing, and seamlessly integrating with other software processes. OpCon shines in its adaptability, innovative scheduling solutions, self-service capabilities, and automation-driven reduction in human mistakes. It offers a visually appealing interface, database functionality, and the option to create a dedicated testing environment.
AutoSys needs to enhance its integration with cloud services, reporting capabilities, Linux environment compatibility, migration ease, file transfer job handling, monitoring capabilities, advanced features, workflow management, and workload window management. OpCon could benefit from improvements in its web-based interface, upgrade process, documentation, programming and configuration complexity, mobile app availability, failover functionality, licensing, training for support staff, UI functionality, self-service capabilities, custom job subtypes, and mainframe support.
Service and Support: AutoSys Workload Automation's customer service is highly praised for being very good, helpful, and responsive. OpCon's customer service is described as great, timely, and helpful. However, there have been instances where OpCon provided solutions that were not relevant to customers' problems.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for AutoSys Workload Automation is simple, direct, and fairly fast, typically completed in under 10 minutes. OpCon's initial setup can be intricate, although SMA consultants can help simplify its management.
Pricing: AutoSys Workload Automation has a setup cost that involves a yearly subscription and an annual license, along with separate costs for agents and server setup. OpCon offers fair pricing and licensing with a tiered pricing model. However, some customers have faced higher licensing costs and encountered setup issues with OpCon.
ROI: AutoSys offers advantages such as time and cost savings, improved reliability, scalability, and compliance. OpCon users have reported significant return on investment, including time savings, error reduction, increased productivity, and the elimination of full-time operators.
Comparison Results: AutoSys Workload Automation is the preferred choice when compared to OpCon. Users praise AutoSys for its simple and straightforward setup, scalability, user-friendly interface, speed, and availability. They appreciate features such as file transfer protocol and file watcher.
"I find that it provides better agility in regards to job execution features."
"The actual scheduling of our jobs has helped us tremendously. Before it was all done manually, and we've totally automated the whole functionality, so there's no longer a case where somebody didn't run something."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"The solution has been stable."
"It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets."
"The aggregator reporting utility which tells us our throughput in lag and latency."
"We use CA Workload Automation AE r11.3.6 to automate enterprise-wide scheduling and file transfers using an FTP plugin."
"Inherit Dependencies feature reduces scheduling errors for holiday processing."
"Since we got it configured, it has just done the job day in, day out. Being able to rely on it and know that it's going to happen, whether there's a person over it or not, is really good."
"The most valuable features are its integration into Windows, into VM, and into AIX, as well as SQL."
"It allows batch work to run as smoothly and efficiently as possible."
"It seems like it would scale well."
"Having the jobs laid out while attaching dependencies is a nice addition to the program."
"File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder."
"It can run scripted tasks automatically over and over without intervention. That is what it does and the part that I really like because repetitive tasks need to be done over and over, day after day, no matter what day of the week it is. It is difficult to have staff do these manually and consistently, especially over weekends or through the night. Instead, you can have OpCon do them."
"Manual processing has been automated 99 percent by OpCon. With new processes, we give it at least two weeks manual so we can write down the details of how to do the steps, then we automate it. Within a month, it has been automated, then it's no longer a manual process."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
"In terms of what should be in the next release, I want integration and AI and so on. I'd like easy reporting where you can compare information, for example, "that job normally takes three minutes and last time it took six minutes or 10 minutes." Then you can get the information to the engineer of which job is taking more time than normal - understanding strange behavior compared to the baseline."
"They could do better supporting it. They have too many of the same type of products, so sometimes it doesn't get as much attention as it should."
"An area for improvement in AutoSys Workload Automation is that it lacks advanced features or advanced built-in functionalities found in competitors, for example, an advanced workflow feature. Even the handling or notification from AutoSys Workload Automation isn't the best in the industry. Other products have very good workflow-related functionalities such as ActiveBatch that's missing in AutoSys Workload Automation, so I wish the tool had those features."
"I would like to see the Service Orchestrator, a B2B product, and maybe a process audit."
"We have to escalate through channels to get to somebody who knows what's going on. It takes time that we do not necessarily have."
"Documentation and cross-application externals could be improved."
"The visibility and control features are somewhat limited."
"We would like a display of the created date, created by, and last modified date, as well as modified by."
"The learning curve could be shorter. The problem is that it's difficult to simplify a product without taking away functionality. I would love to see OpCon become a little easier to grasp. However, my concern is that making things easier isn't always better for the product. If they can keep the integrity of the product while making it easier to learn, that would be an area of improvement."
"We are still in the early stages of our implementation, so at this point, I cannot see any needed improvements or features."
"There is room for improvement needed around setting up the calendars and frequencies. I would like more flexibility in what jobs run. Sometimes, with frequencies, I can't find what I want to without putting a little more labor into it."
"It is a complex product to use. Programming the schedules is complex. It does require training from OpCon... I would like to see some online training, some videos. When I bring in a new employee... it would be nice if there was some basic information for her to look at to understand this program. Even for my systems administrator, it would be helpful if there were tips and tricks available."
"We have not explored the possibility, but one of the areas for improvement would be more integration into Active Directory, to where it could do the creation of user accounts and the additional work to integrate third-party systems into payroll systems."
"The calendar interface and the frequency interface is a very powerful, yet complex, section of OpCon in which all our staff have made mistakes. They have implemented what they believed was logically correct and then afterward discovered that their logic was flawed because OpCon did it a different way. That part, which is incredibly useful, is also incredibly dangerous. The interface or the ability to directly do more functions within the frequency definitely has room for expansion. As good as it is, it can be a lot better."
"Licensing would be the first part I would overhaul. Each time a new licensing paradigm comes out, more features are removed and costs are added. They "add" features that are rarely used and increase charges for the number of jobs run. I'm sure someone in finance got a raise for their brilliance but the end-users won't thank them one bit. Expect price hikes and threats when you hold them to account at every opportunity."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while OpCon is ranked 9th in Workload Automation with 56 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while OpCon is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpCon writes "Gives us the ability to schedule dependent jobs across different mainframes". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Stonebranch and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas OpCon is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation, UiPath and Tidal by Redwood. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. OpCon report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload 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.
