We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Automic Workload Automation is highly praised for its strength, adaptability, and straightforward setup. It provides the capability to oversee various operating systems and products. IBM Workload Automation permits users to ask for added features and can initiate tasks across multiple nodes.
Automic Workload Automation can enhance its offerings in various aspects including pre-configured automation sets, multilingual support, features, user interface, web-based edition functionalities, file transfer management, pricing options, and customer assistance. IBM Workload Automation faces performance difficulties, navigation complexities, and requires enhancements in job dependencies, scheduling refreshes, simulation capabilities, system stability, reporting visibility, and API integration.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation is known for its satisfactory customer service, while IBM Workload Automation is highly regarded for its exceptional technical support. IBM's lab advocacy program offers in-depth code support, which sets it apart. Automic may encounter challenges in identifying the source of certain issues.
Ease of Deployment: Automic Workload Automation's initial setup duration varies based on the project size, requiring a team of one to three individuals. IBM Workload Automation's setup may pose challenges for individuals unfamiliar with IBM tools. Nevertheless, with guidance, the process becomes relatively easy.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a higher setup cost as it is determined by the number of systems being orchestrated. IBM. Automic's pricing is considered to be one of the most expensive in the market.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation's value was not mentioned, however, it is often viewed as an extra cost. IBM Workload Automation strives to enhance efficiency, decrease expenses, and boost productivity, with ROI differing depending on specific objectives and use cases.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred option over IBM Workload Automation,. Automic stands out for its strength, scalability, simplicity of implementation, and wide range of features. It enables management of various operating systems and products, which is particularly beneficial for environments with a combination of outdated and modern technologies. Automic also provides predefined templates for specific tasks and allows different users to have access.
"I have found new methods for converting scripts from Dollar U to ONE Automation. For example, I take the dynamic library from Dollar U and put it in the dynamic binary library in ONE Automation. This enables us to use Dollar U scripts in ONE Automation."
"It improves the visibility of what is going on on the system. If I have a problem, it is easy to identify, understand dependencies, and identifying the root causes than just running through scripts and searching through applications or servers."
"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline."
"As far as our schedules, if we have problems, we can create our own process in the automation, which is good."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that we can control between a lot of operating systems and other products because we have a lot of old and new products in our environment. It helps us to control all of them together."
"It is not possible do our jobs without automation software. Automic is a great help to us."
"The most important and critical process business in the bank, including COB, closed or business, which has to run on a daily basis, is automated."
"It enables us to build automation which is flexible in a controlled environment."
"Technical support from IBM is very good."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"The support from Cisco is very good. I was with them as a company for 40 years"
"The DWC, when configured correctly, is a great GUI tool to provide Self-Service Scheduling capabilities to the user community."
"The project we worked on involved the running of nearly 24,000 job instances in a single day, so I would say that the solution is stable."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"There are pain points, like anything else. Sometimes, things they say work, and sometimes, they don't work. You need to find out why they don't work and then go back and have them fixed."
"The user interface has room for improvement."
"In talking with other customers as well, they would like to see a few enhancements done where you can pull in outside data sources to get a cumulative view from one centralized place."
"The only thing that we would like improved is the FTP agent. It only supports SOCKS proxy, and we would like it to also support an HTTP proxy."
"It has a very complicated interface, which could be made to be more user-friendly."
"I would also like to see a little bit more connectivity, more, "Play nice with other toys." For instance, we have IServ as our primary tool for our service request tickets. In order for it to play nice with Automic, we had to actually create a file and put it somewhere, where Automic can see it. I would like to see more connectivity with other tools, or more compatibility with other tools."
"A little less button clicking, in the navigation of the tool itself would also help. There is a lot out there, and I understand that's what keeps the tool robust. It keeps our options open, but it's a bit click-y sometimes. To get where you need to go, you have to go through 10 levels."
"The forecast and long-term planning could be made a little better when you work with it in the future."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"Scalability-wise, it can be a little bit challenging."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while IBM Workload Automation is ranked 13th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2. 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 ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and OpCon, whereas IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. IBM 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.
