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, Appian and others in Process Automation."The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."
"The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice."
"Self Service for repeatable, low impact workload automation processes."
"First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate."
"The scheduling feature and scheduling tool are the most valuable features. I like the scheduling services that we have in Control-M, which are very beneficial to our organization because they are automating things. There is also less manual work. We can schedule a task without any manual interruptions."
"Control-M has helped us resolve issues 70% to 80% faster. It provides us with alerts instead of having someone go to that particular server and check the logs to determine where the issue is. We can simply click on the alert information, then everything is in front of us. This provides us with time savings, human effort savings, and process savings."
"Automation of the batch jobs is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"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."
"But for some issues, BMC will suggest to upgrade to new version which will not be feasible to standards of the organisation. Hence some work around should be shown to run the business until new version was upgraded."
"There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly."
"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."
"The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT."
"I would like to see more auditing capabilities. Right now, it has the basics and I've been trying to set those up to work with what our auditors are looking for."
"The Control-M API does not support SQL database-type jobs, where a job has been configured to use the SQL catalog to locate SSIS."
"I've never been very successful when researching ways to utilize Batch Impact Manager. It's a tool to set up dummy jobs in your job flow and it's supposed to come back to you and say, 'Okay, for this job flow, you are 50 percent complete at a certain point in time'...I would like things like Batch Impact Manager to be a little more user-friendly, out-of-the-box."
"We did encounter a few scalability issues. Sometimes, there are too many jobs in our environment on different servers, but that’s not the tool issue, we can simply increase the FS size. However, that requires bank cost; hence the scalability issue."
"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 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while Oracle Process Cloud Service is ranked 16th 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, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation, 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.
