We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Orchestration and Control-M based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We particularly like the integration functionality of this solution. This product is open API, which means that it can be integrated with any solution from any other brand."
"The best thing about TrueSight is the user interface, which is intuitive and easy to use. It supports accessibility and exporting, so we can output to the format we require. We can use TrueSight to integrate nearly any other product. I can't think of another product that can match this functionality. We also have Microsoft Orchestrator, but it can't match BMC TrueSight Orchestration."
"I find the provisioning to be the most valuable."
"The best feature of BMC TrueSight Orchestration is the number of integrated mechanisms it provides."
"The product has a very good triggering mechanism."
"We can implement compliance standards with the solution. You can also do patching so that the environment is compliant and secure from external threats and hacking. We can provision multiple systems with the help of predefined templates that the organization has forwarded us. The solution’s users can also integrate multiple products which can be either BMC or non-BMC. There are numerous possibilities that can be done with server automation"
"This solution is scalable."
"The initial setup is easy. The deployment was done in an hour."
"The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job."
"The most valuable features are the GUI console, stability, and workflow."
"Control-M is excellent when it comes to building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Those workflows are of very high importance to our operations."
"It has certainly helped speed things up."
"It has multiple features. You can plan your execution in Control-M. It provides one single window where you can define workflows regardless of geographic boundaries and platforms. A batch process can be executed from this single window. It provides insights into your processes. Your business people will know what process they are running and what is the state of the process. Instead of knowing that they're not going to meet the SLA the next morning, the business people immediately know the changes in their process. Control-M is very easy. I can tell a non-technical person that this is how it works, and he would be able to easily understand it. Business people can understand the methodology of Control-M and the intuitive features that it has. It has a fantastic graphical user interface and is easy to understand. You just have to drag and drop but in a very intuitive way. Monitoring features are also good. It has different color coding schemes, which can help you to understand the status of your workflow. An operator who is not that technical and is just monitoring the status of the application can see by color-coding the status of a process. If anything goes wrong or a process is stuck, it gives you a hint. You can just right-click and see the logs and the output. Even if the system is not right there in the data center and is located somewhere else, you can monitor it right from there and see the workflows."
"Control-M has improved application reliability and the SLAs in our company by quite a bit. You can see if problems are coming. If we have an SLA in a couple of hours, we know well before that couple hours if processing is behind, and it allows us to take some preventative action."
"Technical support is very helpful and available 24/7."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The architecture of this solution needs improvement, it is very complicated. It creates a lot of problems in our environment. Most of the time I am trying to find and solve the problem."
"At present this solution is only available to be hosted on-premises, which can cause network issues when integration with cloud-based software is attempted."
"Regarding scalability, the architecture does not allow you to add additional servers just able to use two application servers, so it's not scalable."
"It would be helpful if TrueSight could log errors in a better format. I would also like to see more connector support. Let's say I have a third-party vendor that I need to integrate with Ansible. It would be helpful if BMC announced a specific connector for that. I've encountered situations where I need to work with scripts or find another way to integrate a particular product with TrueSight Orchestration. BMC already supports many products. For example, we have a connector for Ansible, but I think it needs to be improved some."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration is difficult to understand. It's not very user-friendly."
"The solution is not user-friendly."
"BMC TrueSight Orchestration could improve by providing some visibility on how the workflows are progressing."
"We are aiming for AI automation and look for support from BMC. The features are currently missing but we are hoping for some upgrade in this matter."
"The performance could be better. Control-M Enterprise Manager tends to slow the system down even on a server with a six-core processor and 32 gigabytes RAM. The console is Java-based, so maybe OpenJDK 16 or 17 would be a performance improvement."
"I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data."
"The biggest improvement they could have is better QA testing before releases come out the door."
"There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go."
"The reporting functionality needs a lot of work. We have faced problems with different versions where we run the right report, but it gives us blank entries. Then, when we run the same report again, it gives the correct data."
"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."
"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."
"A Control-M on-prem license is based on the number of jobs, which is the number of tasks a particular customer wants to have. These tasks have to be run within 24 hours window. For example, if you have a license for 100 jobs, you can run a maximum of 100 jobs in a 24-hour window. If your operations could not run 10 jobs, and they ran only 90 jobs, they just carry over to the next day, but the next day, they will have 110 jobs. Control-M asks you to buy those 10 more licenses because you were out of compliance in terms of the number of licenses. This is something that needs to be indicated in Control-M GUI so that customers know the number of licenses they're going to use in this time window. Their support and documentation should be improved. I am not that satisfied with their customer support. Sometimes, they don't have the answers. Their documentation is very poor. It is not well written, and it is not in a very logical manner. You can use it on Unix, Linux, Windows, and AIX, but it needs some improvement on iSeries. It needs a built-in mechanism inside the system to give you an option to restore from the last point of failure. If a process crashes, the Control-M needs to have a mechanism in iSeries where the process can be restored from the last point of failure."
BMC TrueSight Orchestration is ranked 15th in Process Automation with 9 reviews while Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews. BMC TrueSight Orchestration is rated 8.0, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Orchestration writes "An orchestration tool to automate the end-to-end process with a need to improve its user experience". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". BMC TrueSight Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ServiceNow Orchestration, CA Process Automation and Camunda, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence. See our BMC TrueSight Orchestration vs. Control-M report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
