We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and OpCon 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 known for its strength, adaptability, and straightforward setup. It provides management over various operating systems and products, which is advantageous for environments with a blend of outdated and modern technologies. Recent enhancements include web browser accessibility and perspective analytics. OpCon is highly regarded for its versatility, integration abilities, and self-service option. It permits users to automate tasks based on their individual requirements, minimizing mistakes and enhancing productivity. The graphical user interface, database functionality, and on-demand access are also noteworthy attributes.
Automic Workload Automation could improve in out-of-box automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition, file transfer, pricing, and support. OpCon could be enhanced in terms of web-based interface functionality, compatibility, documentation, accessibility, user-side web interface, licensing, support, features, and integration with FICS.
Service and Support: Customers have expressed varying opinions about the customer service for Automic Workload Automation. Some have appreciated the prompt response times and informative knowledge articles, while others have faced challenges in contacting the support team. OpCon's customer service and support have garnered positive feedback, with customers commending the technical support team for their timely assistance and efficient resolutions.
Ease of Deployment: Automic can take anywhere from one to five days to set up, whereas OpCon's setup can be complex but is simplified with the help of SMA consultants. Automic only needs a team of one to three people, while OpCon necessitates close collaboration with SMA and training.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a high setup cost, whereas OpCon is known for being pricey and intricate. Despite this, OpCon is recognized as a cost-effective choice.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation did not present clear ROI figures and was not renewed due to budget reductions. OpCon demonstrated substantial advantages by saving time, minimizing errors, and enhancing productivity, resulting in a strong return on investment.
Comparison Results: OpCon is the preferred choice when compared to Automic Workload Automation. Users appreciate OpCon's flexibility, integration capabilities, self-service feature, and graphical user interface. OpCon allows users to automate tasks according to their specific needs, reducing human error. The customer service and technical support for OpCon are highly regarded, with quick response times and effective solutions.
"Being able to script, create something I want the software to do for a specific job. This allows me to do that. Very powerful."
"It saves a lot of time and mistakes, because we used to do a lot of manual work. Since we added automation a little bit over a year now, it has enhanced our daily work."
"It is the automation. Saving time and money is the key. We automate everything."
"Number one, A+, is the scripting language, and the ability to go in, and take an already robust, consistent, strong tool, and turn it into an incredibly scalable, flexible tool, that you can literally do anything you want to with."
"It's easy to train other people. A new developer could come in and learn it very quickly."
"The most valuable feature is that it can be installed on any type of application on every kind of operating system and the agent can use it on these applications and systems."
"Support is good and it works fine."
"One of the big features that they did implement, that a lot of people, us included, were asking for for a long time, is the ability to do zero downtime upgrades. They have introduced that."
"The core system is the most valuable part: being able to view the processes that we've never really been able to view as a whole before. That is super-helpful, as is being alerted when issues arise."
"It seems like it would scale well."
"It's very scalable. Right now we're barely scratching the surface of what it can do. I've looked at Symitar's instance of OpCon and they're running something like 13,000 jobs a day with all the clients that they have. So it can go from small use cases like ours to enterprise-level."
"There's also a self-service solution manager... that allows us to enable staff to run complex automation tasks by clicking a button and entering some information. They don't have to have access to the OpCon environment to kick off those kinds of events."
"I find OpCon's ability to monitor files and folders, and its integration with other software to be the most valuable."
"It has also helped to streamline our operations. We contract out our collection department so they are no longer housed on our system. They're housed on another platform. OpCon is able to not only pull in our data, but it also, on a daily basis, updates that third-party."
"The whole product is valuable to us because of the integrations that it has with the MCP and the Windows environments. You have to have the agent on each one of them that you want to monitor. The integrations that we have created are along the lines of extracting files and sending them through SFTP to another vendor. Those are the things that were taking a lot of time away from my staff."
"I rate OpCon support 10 out of 10. I've never had a problem with them. I've always been able to get answers quickly and always seem to find a knowledgeable person to assist with any questions."
"They should work to reduce pricing."
"There are too many bugs to be solved after a version upgrade. We are working on the limits of an architecture with 16,000 platforms. It is impossible to test everything out in the software lab of CA."
"I hope in the next release that they will solve all the bugs which they have found in development."
"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."
"There were many bugs in the last version. For example, we could only use capital letters for searching for agent names. Also, we had a problem with ONE Automation where we couldn't use the PGA and SGA in Oracle Databases for resolving RAM because the last version didn't have this capability."
"The pricing has the potential to be high."
"I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution."
"Our users are used to the flatline of the UC4. When we introduced the AVI, they are not interested nor motivated to use it."
"It's not something you can just quickly grab, try, run, and play with. You have to get the knowledge and train yourself. It was easy for me, but I also took the time to throw myself into it. There is a learning curve to a certain extent. You have to learn the rules."
"The UI refresh rate is really bad and needs improvement."
"I think that they're working on this, but I wish that there was a more centralized area to be able to see what other people are doing... They have a community platform for OpCon users, but I want to see more of where somebody is doing this process in that way. They have a great community platform right now, but I feel that it could be developed."
"The calendar interface and the frequency interface is a very powerful, yet complex, section of OpCon in which all our staff have made mistakes. They have implemented what they believed was logically correct and then afterward discovered that their logic was flawed because OpCon did it a different way. That part, which is incredibly useful, is also incredibly dangerous. The interface or the ability to directly do more functions within the frequency definitely has room for expansion. As good as it is, it can be a lot better."
"There is one feature that has been a difficult problem, and right now, OpCon can't do it. I'm not sure if it should be expected to, but we have tried to get it to where it could start a process on an external database."
"I would like more web-based training from SMA. That would be nice. Our primary OpCon representative is phenomenal, but we would like some training opportunities for learning on our own. When I started utilizing OpCon, the sheer breadth of it made for a very daunting task. I was almost fearful to start, not to mention fearful to go change things and possibly hinder a job."
"The SQL database connections are the only time that we've had issues with reliability and stability of the software."
"Usage is a little complex. It's not like you can bring somebody in and they can just use it. They have to be trained... As far as complexity goes, it's right up there."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while OpCon is ranked 9th in Workload Automation with 56 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while OpCon is rated 9.2. 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 OpCon writes "Gives us the ability to schedule dependent jobs across different mainframes". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and Redwood RunMyJobs, whereas OpCon is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, UiPath and VisualCron. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. OpCon 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.