We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AppWorx Workload Automation is highly praised for its easy-to-use interface and dependable performance. Users appreciate its simplicity and efficiency in managing nightly tasks and performing calculations. Automic Workload Automation is known for its impressive strength, scalability, and seamless integration. It offers seamless control over various operating systems and products, along with pre-defined templates and convenient web browser access.
The users recommend that AppWorx Workload Automation should focus on improving API integration, integration with other tools, and scalability. Automic Workload Automation needs enhancements in automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition, file transfer, pricing, and support.
Service and Support: AppWorx Workload Automation has been praised for its customer service and highly rated technical support. Automic Workload Automation has received mixed feedback, with some customers praising the support while others have faced challenges in reaching the team.
Ease of Deployment: AppWorx Workload Automation's initial setup is considered relatively easy. However, it can be a time-consuming process. Administrator access and involvement are necessary for the setup. Automic Workload Automation's setup time and complexity can vary. It can be completed within one to five days, depending on the specific requirements.
Pricing: AppWorx Workload Automation has a costly setup determined by the number of orchestrated systems used. Automic Workload Automation has made pricing and licensing changes, making it more affordable. It is considered one of the most expensive options on the market, as the cost depends on the number of systems being orchestrated.
ROI: There are no specific details about the ROI for AppWorx Workload Automation. Users mentioned Automic Workload Automation was not renewed due to cost-cutting measures, indicating it was seen as an extra cost.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred choice over AppWorx Workload Automation. Users appreciate its robustness, scalability, and ease of implementation. They also commend its extensive features and user-friendly interface. Automic Workload Automation offers a versatile single solution that can handle different use cases without requiring additional tools.
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"It has improved my organization through automation of back office and infrastructure procedures, and by integrating and orchestrating key business applications spanning multiple technology stacks."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"The interface is good."
"It is an object-based approach to task and process design in conjunction with conditional logic and event-based scheduling actions, which enables a build once/use often design methodology to be employed."
"The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"The main things that we use it for are job control and batch. For these, it does very well."
"It's very hard to transfer the feeling when you have a platform that came to handle infrastructure issues, but at the end of the day, they are making real changes and impacting our business level, which is amazing, because it's very uncommon. That's it, basicalSly."
"We use the FTP agent excessively, and the connection is easy to handle between our company and the outside."
"It works. It does not fail. If something fails, it is not Automic."
"The night processing helps to have data just-in-time for the morning."
"We can take something from crontab, something that's very nitty-gritty and low-level, and be able to put it into a nice interface, and be able to track it at every junction along the way, add alerting, interdependencies."
"The most valuable feature is it always runs things automatically that you normally have to do manually, like download files."
"Our customers appreciate it mostly because it takes a lot of effort away from them."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"It has been a deprecated product, because it is so old. There has been a couple of new solutions that are a little more advanced."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"The scalability could improve."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"We are looking for additional features that would allow us to call APIs and integrate the product with other tools more effectively."
"It would be better if it was easier to view the automated processes."
"I should be able to grant a user access to execute a job without having to directly list every include, prompt set, output scan, script, login, etc. An inherited read for execution purposes would accomplish the same results without making the admin list every single object every time, as well as deny the user the ability to edit."
"There are some problems when using the new interface."
"Today, we use a rich client for this product. In the future, or for the next release, they will be using a web interface. This web interface is not as scalable as the rich client for us. The web client is not 100 percent programmed as we need it."
"They need to handle cross datacenter failover. They have a really good High Availability solution that works well within a single sysplex, but in our environment, since we have two main datacenter locations, we have two separate sysplex."
"Its dashboard can be improved. In version 12, they have already moved to a web-based interface from a UI. We are looking into this feature now. We are also looking for available APIs that we can use to interface the engine into our other systems. There should be a subservice facility that we can use to interface with Microsoft Teams and send out authorization on job executions. We have seen a feature like this in other products that we are looking into."
"ServiceNow creates problems with the Automic entry of the connector, so the stability could be a little bit better with this product."
"I would like more training on workload automation, because I do not have a complete insight of the product yet."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence, Stonebranch and OpCon, whereas Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. Automic Workload Automation 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.
Hello Rick, I couldn't help you with the Appwork applications manager.
On the other hand, one thing that is certain that
we are satisfied to have migrated all our jobs processing under OpCon (120 000
jobs/days) since 2018.
We have improved in terms
of service quality, we have made progress in the automation of our business
process and we benefit from more functionalities and reduces operating costs.
OpCon is a true
Enterprise Scheduler.
I hope this will help you in your
research.
Ian,
It isn't that AWA wont work. It comes down to support from another vendor. The vendor isn't currently familiar with AWA, so they are taking classes, and will be able to support it in the future
We are about to start to use AWA and was wondering why that platform will not work for you going forward?
@NickWilcox you recently reviewed OpCon - would you be willing to share your experiences with @Rick Murray to help him with his decision? @reviewer1166826 maybe you can give some insight into the pros and cons of AppWorx?
I am sorry because cannot help you. We have no experience with Appworx Application Manager.