We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch 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: ActiveBatch Workload Automation is highly praised for its versatility and ease of use. Users appreciate the prebuilt jobs and real-time monitoring capabilities, as well as the automatic scheduling feature. Tidal Automation is known for its excellent job scheduling and single pane of glass interface, which allows for convenient management. Users also value the flexibility in running jobs and the data security features offered by Tidal Automation.
ActiveBatch could improve licensing, user interface, trigger reliability, documentation, support services, and integration capabilities. Tidal Automation could benefit from enhancements in its user interface, pricing model, integration options, and customization features.
Service and Support: Users have provided positive feedback for the customer service of ActiveBatch Workload Automation, appreciating the helpfulness, reliability, and responsiveness of the support team. However, there are concerns regarding the service model and availability of the hotline. Tidal Automation has highly praised customer service that is responsive, knowledgeable, and willing to assist. The experienced support team promptly addresses problems, although there are occasional mentions of lower-priority items being overlooked.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for ActiveBatch Workload Automation was smooth and straightforward, without any significant challenges. However, there was a minor requirement for additional documentation during the file import. The setup for Tidal Automation was described as easy to handle and uncomplicated, with useful documentation available. Some users expressed a desire for more training to tackle complex tasks.
Pricing: Users find the setup cost for ActiveBatch Workload Automation to be quick and straightforward. The pricing is seen as reasonable and competitive. Tidal Automation's pricing is also fair and predictable, with a transparent licensing model. However, some users mention the complexity of licensing when additional adapters are required.
ROI: ActiveBatch Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ability to enhance net revenue, offering a valuable solution. Tidal Automation streamlines operations, mitigates risks, and consolidates tasks, providing substantial benefits in terms of reducing manual efforts and improving overall job management.
Comparison Results: Tidal Automation is the favored choice over ActiveBatch Workload Automation. Users commend Tidal Automation's job scheduler, streamlined interface, and ability to run jobs on various servers. The user-friendly interface and seamless integration with other systems are also highly regarded.
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to trigger workflows, one after another, based on success, without having to worry about overlapping workflows. The ability to integrate our BI, analytics, and our data quality jobs is also valuable"
"Error Handling is one of the best standout features of ActiveBatch."
"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."
"It is very useful in sending confidential files through FPP servers."
"The most valuable feature is its stability. We've only had very minor issues and generally they have happened because someone has applied a patch on a Windows operating system and it has caused some grief. We've actually been able to resolve those issues quite quickly with ActiveBatch. In all the time that I've had use of ActiveBatch, it hasn't failed completely once. Uptime is almost 100 percent."
"I found ActiveBatch Workload Automation to be a very good scheduling tool. What I like best about it is that it has very less downtime when managing many complex scheduling workflows, so I'm very impressed with ActiveBatch Workload Automation."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is the versatility of the prebuilt jobs."
"The job dependency is something that you cannot have in a regular, simple cron job or simple scheduler dependency. The event-driven jobs are core for us, as we really need that. Therefore, we really need Tidal with its ability to run thousands of jobs per day."
"It saves times due to automation. With some files, we do hundreds a day for a particular vendor. This would be hard to do manually. Also, the speed at which we can do this is excellent."
"The first, big thing that we got out of using Tidal Workload Automation was having a centralized view of the status of all of our batch processes across all these systems... We can look into the schedule at any given time and see if things are running on track or if they are falling behind. We can also see if something failed."
"The feature that I find to be valuable, as I'm working with other folks, is the ability to cross-schedule across platforms, and the flexibility that comes with that."
"From a management standpoint, when using the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads, I've never had a problem with the application. It's very interactive, especially with the different security levels that they offer."
"It is intended to enable large-scale automation environments, making it appropriate for companies with complicated processes and big data volumes."
"For us, the calendaring system is very robust. Some of the teams have very specific requests for when they need jobs to run. That's been really valuable, because a lot of times, when people run scripts, if they run on a holiday, they're going to fail... A couple of times a month it probably saves us work and the necessity of logging in from home and checking to make sure everything's okay."
"The best feature of Tidal Workload Automation Software is its ease of integration with other systems, including ERP, CRM, and BI tools."
"There are some issues with this version and finding the jobs that it ran. If you're looking at 1,000 different jobs, it shows based on the execution time, not necessarily the run time. So, if there was a constraint waiting, you may be looking for it in the wrong time frame. Plus, with thousands of jobs showing up and the way it pages output jobs, sometimes you end up with multiple pages on the screen, then you have to go through to find the specific job you're looking for. On the opposite side, you can limit the daily activity screen to show only jobs that failed or jobs currently running, which will shrink that back down. However, we have operators who are looking at the whole nightly cycle to make sure everything is there and make sure nothing got blocked or was waiting. Sometimes, they have a hard time finding every item within the list."
"A cloud option is not provided as a free feature, making it a costly solution for smaller organizations."
"One thing I've noticed is that navigation can be difficult unless you are familiar with the structure that we have in place. If someone else had to look at our ActiveBatch console and find a job, they might not know where to find it."
"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"The help center and documentation are not that helpful."
"Providing some detailed training materials could be very helpful for new users who have very limited technical information about the tool."
"It could be easier to provide dashboards on how many jobs are running at the same time; more monitoring."
"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."
"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."
"Setting up the initial product was a little hard."
"For the most part, the drill-down and the logging are really good. But if we take an Informatica job, for example: We have the ability, and the operators have the ability, to actually drill down and see, at a session level, where the failure is. There is, unfortunately, no way to extract that into an actual output email or failure email. It's not that that information is not available, but extracting it into an email would be a nice-to-have."
"One of the weaknesses of the product is, when something happens, it's difficult to find out the root cause. There are a lot of logs you can take a look at in Tidal. Sometimes, they are useful, but other times, they're not. That is mostly relegated to the administrative team. Users for the most part don't see that and don't know anything about that. They just know they have a problem, then it's up to the administrative team to see what happened and figure out the problem."
"The UI might have the potential to provide a more polished and user-centric encounter, promoting seamless engagements and simplifying the navigation process for individuals interacting with the software."
"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."
"I would like more involvement with the cloud."
"The product’s UI is outdated. They should work on this particular area."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 4th in Workload Automation with 35 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". 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". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, IBM Workload Automation and JSCAPE by Redwood, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs and Rocket Zeke. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood 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.