We performed a comparison between Control-M and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, BMC and others in Process Automation."The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the features and perform various tasks."
"Workload Archiving is a very good feature for us. It helps with our customer requirements in terms of reporting and auditing... Previously, when we didn't have any archive server, we managed the data in Control-M with man-made scripts, and we would pull the data for the last 365 days, or three or four months back. Since we installed the archiving, we have been able to pull the data, anytime and anywhere, with just one click."
"It gives us the ability to have end-to-end workflows, no matter where they're running."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
"The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice."
"The File Watcher utility, cyclic jobs, and email alert notification are valuable."
"It has a very good GUI. We can search for a job very easily. The web interface, user account creation, and access control are very good. From an access control point of view, we can provide access to as many users as we want. A second group of users can be given a certain number of features, according to the requirements. The web interface is very easy for end users to login and use. A lot of features have been added, e.g., adding jobs. They can add jobs to their stuff, whatever they want, then get it validated by the scheduling team and work it into production."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"This solution allows us to stitch a lot of different parts of the workflow together."
"We can automate a few host configurations using the product."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that we don’t need an agent for it to work."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
"Ansible Tower offers use a UI where we can see all the pushes that have gone into the server."
"I like being able to control multiple systems and push out updates quickly with just a couple of clicks of a button and commands. I like the automation because it is a time saver."
"Ansible is agentless. So, we don't need to set up any agent into the computer we are interacting with. The only prerequisite is that the host with which we are going to interact must have the Python interpreter installed on it. We can connect to a host and do our configuration by using Ansible."
"Feature-wise, the solution is a good open-source software offering broad support. Also, it's reliable."
"Control-M reporting is a bit of a pain point right now. Control-M doesn't have robust reporting. I would like to see better reporting options. I would like to be able to pull charts or statistics that look nicer. Right now, we can pull some data, but it is kind of choppy. It would be nicer to have enterprise-level reporting that you can present to managers."
"The community and the networking that goes on within that community need improvement. We want to be able to reach out to an SME, and say, "Hey, we are doing it this way. Does that make sense?" Ideally, they come back. and say, "Yes, it does make sense to do it that way. However, if you want to do it this way, then it is a little more efficient." We understand that one solution framework doesn't fit everybody. Depending on the breadth of the data and how broad it is, you may have different models for one over the other."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"The stability could be improved. I ran into an issue with a recent Control-M patch. The environment would become unstable if security ports were scanned. This is an area they need to improve on, but ultimately it's a relatively small improvement."
"They really need to work on improving the web interface, as there are still a lot of bugs... In general, they need to do a lot of work on shoring up their testing and quality assurance. A lot of bugs seem to make it into the product."
"Consider adding a mobile application for remote management."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."
"What I'm trying to figure out, personally, is, when doing mass updates, how I can parallelize that a little bit better. It seems right now - and maybe, it's a shortcoming on my end - that I run through one set of servers, and then another set of servers, ad then another set of servers, but it seems like I could throw a lot of these checks out. Different types of servers, like web servers and DB servers, if I could parallelize that a little bit to make everything run a little bit more efficiently, that would help."
"The support could be better."
"It needs better documentation."
"When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."
"Networking needs to be improved."
"There is always room for improvement in features or customer support."
"There needs to be improvement in the orchestration."
"The documentation for the installation step of deployment, OpenStack, etc., and these things have to be a bit more detailed."
More Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is ranked 1st in Configuration Management with 62 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform writes "Makes it easy to build playbooks and saves time and resources". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and Stonebranch, whereas Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Aria Automation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and AWS Systems Manager.
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.
