We performed a comparison between IBM Workload Automation and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"The support from Cisco is very good. I was with them as a company for 40 years"
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"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."
"This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released."
"Technical support from IBM is very good."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward."
"It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in."
"The most valuable feature of SCCM is the application distribution."
"Endpoint Manager is valuable to our organization because it allows us to connect to our enterprise from remote locations securely. The most useful feature is its robustness and scalability. It is highly scalable and flexible, allowing us to use it in various environments. Additionally, we can specialize the policies related to each device group. This ensures that each group has access to the applications they need for their work and non-work hours."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is patch management."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"It's a stable product."
"It's helped us solve problems surrounding patching, installing, and reporting different patches, etc., on the virtual machines."
"Scalability-wise, it can be a little bit challenging."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"It should support other schedulers that aren't IBM products."
"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."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile app that could be used to follow the job schedule."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"Marketing: Our management doesn't understand that there is a piece of software which helps them automate and manage the entire network, as far as operating systems on computers."
"In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments."
"Could do with some cosmetic improvements on the user interface."
"There is a reboot issue with the patching. Sometimes, if patching runs into any issue whatsoever, it doesn't reboot but it doesn't tell you it errored out. It just sits there and we don't find out until the next day whether it patched or not. That was a big issue for us. We're working through that. They added some stuff in there now where you can actually tell reboot is pending. But we still need some kind of notification that if something fails or is pending, we know. We shouldn't have to go in and look. They don't have anything for that right now."
"In terms of the monitoring, the timeframe it takes to actually report back on the compliance of a device after it has been patched is a bit too long."
"I would like to see some improvements in WSUS and control of other, non-Microsoft, product updates."
"The deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Workload Automation is ranked 13th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews. IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Affordable, easy to use, and easy to understand". IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Tidal by Redwood, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Microsoft Intune.
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.