We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation and Tidal Automation 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 continuous availability. It particularly shines in efficiently managing job sequencing, executing real-time batch tasks, and seamlessly connecting various software processes. Tidal Automation distinguishes itself with its exceptional job scheduling capabilities, consolidated and intuitive interface, versatile job execution options, and seamless integration with different systems.
AutoSys needs enhancements in cloud service integration, reporting and performance comparison, Linux compatibility, migration capabilities, monitoring, advanced features, and workload window management. Tidal Automation would benefit from improvements in result interpretation, pricing model simplification, user interface, AI and machine learning capabilities, integration, job dependency management, security, performance and scalability, customization, collaboration, alerting configurations, and adaptability.
Service and Support: The customer service for Tidal Automation is commendable for its impressive product knowledge and willingness to assist with integration. However, there are occasional mentions of lower-priority items getting lost in the mix for Tidal Automation. AutoSys support is sufficient and capable with standardized approaches.
Ease of Deployment: The setup for AutoSys Workload Automation is described as quick and hassle-free, taking approximately 10 minutes or less. Tidal Automation's setup is easy and straightforward, however, it requires a significantly longer time of around three weeks to complete.
Pricing: AutoSys Workload Automation has a diverse range of setup costs, including a yearly subscription and an annual license. Tidal Automation is praised for its fair and predictable pricing, offering transparent licensing and the option for additional adapters to cater to specific job needs.
ROI: AutoSys Workload Automation offers benefits such as time savings, improved reliability, scalability, and enhanced visibility and control. Tidal Automation provides advantages like cost savings, increased efficiency, productivity, risk management, and seamless integration.
Comparison Results: AutoSys Workload Automation is the preferred choice when compared to Tidal Automation. Users appreciate AutoSys for its simple setup, scalability, user-friendly interface, and consistent availability. Its valuable features include file transfer protocol and file watcher. Additionally, AutoSys is commended for its reliability and promptness in executing tasks.
"It gives us flexibility when doing releases. We can make changes for one day in a PDS member, since we stage our jobs by date, and the next day the normal job definitions are run."
"We automate recurring processes, keeping track of IT processes controlled worldwide."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"It gives a real-time view of all the batch processing that we have. Monitoring-wise, it is really good."
"The aggregator reporting utility which tells us our throughput in lag and latency."
"The ability to create calendars, calendering for batch jobs to run on a scheduled frequency."
"It has improved my organization by automating IT applications."
"Easy configuration and integration with SAP."
"We have to run about 12,000 jobs every day and the majority of them need to be launched from our ERP, JD Edwards. The native compatibility of the Tidal platform with JD Edwards dovetails with our greatest need. It's directly connected to the heart of our IT system. We couldn't work without it."
"Tidal Automation by Redwood is a user-friendly solution."
"With other tools, you do not have the ability to schedule jobs on their own. You need to create a group and then assign everything to that group. Only then will the job be able to execute. In Tidal, you can schedule a single job and there is no need to create a group. That's what I like the most."
"Thinking of all the people involved in checking jobs on a daily basis, manually running jobs or auditing them through standalone tools, and trying to connect them. We have saved hundreds of hours weekly, which is substantial."
"We use the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads. The solution’s ability to manage and monitor these workloads is very easy and accurate. We have file dependencies for running jobs. The job does not start until a file exists on a completely different server, then where the job will run. So, it is cross systems."
"With the varied features in the varied adapters provided, we use Tidal Enterprise Scheduler because we want everything to be scheduled in one place. Tidal provides that for us with its tools and varying platforms in our organization. Tidal provides all the connectors to the platforms. This is very useful because we don't want to look for another scheduler for scheduling certain jobs. We don't want to look at those schedules manually between platforms."
"The best feature is that it allows task scheduling based on particular occurrences, like the receipt of files, database updates, or system notifications."
"Tidal Workload Automation Software provides the ability to quickly adapt to changing business requirements."
"It lacks support and integration with cloud computing platforms."
"CA Workload Automation is not part of CA's strategic vision going forward."
"I would like to see two-factor authentication, since you see a lot of companies in the news for security breaches. That is a really big thing for us."
"Reduce the number of operational files. This would make the job of a system programmer supporting ESP easier."
"I would like to see the Service Orchestrator, a B2B product, and maybe a process audit."
"Documentation and cross-application externals could be improved."
"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."
"I am not sure whether it is our limitation or a tool limitation because we haven't yet explored it, but whenever we look for different types of reporting, we have some limitations in getting those. It could be because of the way we have set it up internally in our enterprise, but it would be helpful if we can customize the reporting features and some of the alerts that can go out. When we connect enterprise systems, each one looks for a different use case, and if we can get different types of reporting, it will be helpful."
"From an administrative point of view, I wouldn't give really high marks to the solution. I actually entertained getting the JAWS application at one point. One of the shortcomings with the scheduler is the reporting capabilities. At least at the time, JAWS was the best that they had for a third-party integration. I think they've got things in the pipeline to help alleviate that gap."
"The drill-down into details using the Graphical Views feature is a bit difficult and not that helpful. If you want to go into the details, you have to go to the Job Activity. Graphical Views is not that easy for getting that kind of information."
"The solution needs more advanced reporting and data visualization capabilities to enable deeper analysis of job performance and trends."
"The job failure alerts can be updated with more details for better troubleshooting."
"Setting up the initial product was a little hard."
"The software's performance and scalability could be improved, particularly when dealing with large-scale workloads or complex business processes."
"The product’s UI is outdated. They should work on this particular area."
"I'm still hoping with Explorer to be able to see end-to-end job streams. That's not really something that's easy to see today in the web client. However, I haven't worked with Explorer yet. One of the things that we have found frustrating is not being able to see an end-to-end job stream across multiple applications within Tidal. We use jobs for that right now, but I have high hopes that we'll be able to see that in Explorer."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. 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 Tidal by Redwood writes "Great visibility with a single pane of glass and a low learning curve". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automic Workload Automation and OpCon, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, ActiveBatch by Redwood and Rocket Zeke. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Tidal by Redwood 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.