We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and AutoSys Workload Automation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment."
"Deployment workflow (WF) can be designed this way, so that it is not necessary to provide all applications (systems) artifacts of which an application consists."
"Self-service for developers, because they are able to deploy to development departments on their own, without needing people from operations."
"I would say our headwind, or our time to market, is reduced considerably. We get more consistent results out of it, because you write one time and once it's automated you expect it to behave the same way every time. And it cut down a lot of re-work for us."
"The event monitor is very good. You can monitor when the file is created so you can pick up the file once it's done."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"The metrics gathered after deployment, for example, the rate of success versus the rate of failure."
"We have saved on our time costs and have seen more quality."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"The CA workload agent has gotten much better. For our organization it's important for us to communicate in a secure fashion between the host and the other platforms, and we are able to do that with our CA product"
"The most valuable aspects of AutoSys Workload Automation are its performance, scalability, and ease of getting started for new users."
"It scales very well. We can add jobs and remove jobs. We do not have problems maintaining the product across multiple environments and multiple servers."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"It gives a real-time view of all the batch processing that we have. Monitoring-wise, it is really good."
"The features that I have found most valuable with AutoSys are that it is scalable, easy to use, fast, and always available. That's very important because if it's not steady then it's a real problem. So, at this point, we are satisfied with it."
"It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets."
"The dashboard should allow you to see the current state of packages in each environment, not only on an individual application basis, but across the entire application platform."
"There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system."
"There needs to be better error handling and error descriptions. It should be more clear what the errors are and what we can do to fix them."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"Not a perfect ten because the user interface is brand new and it needs improvement."
"At the moment, the version that we are using (version 12.0), the environment is complex with multiple installations. Therefore, the monitoring is not scalable, but this should be improved in 12.1 and 12.2."
"The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"The lack of documentation, that is an issue. When we do need to bring it down for maintenance, it is always a scary moment for us because we have never had it crash."
"Ease of implementation for upgrades."
"We had a few issues, however, the issues were more on the infrastructure rather than with the application itself."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types."
"Documentation and cross-application externals could be improved."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with , whereas AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automic Workload Automation and Stonebranch.
We monitor all Release 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.
