We performed a comparison between BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer and Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I am a partner and an implementer for Control-M. Once purchased by my clients, I implement this solution and provide daily support for this scheduling tool."
"Dashboard and recovery are the features I found most valuable in the solution."
"The file transfer, database, and integration features are the most valuable."
"It is a highly scalable solution...I rate the product's initial setup a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is highly stable. It is enterprise-grade software. Doing a job of 10,000 to 20,000 the solution is very stable."
"The GUI is good if I'm comparing it to other scheduling products."
"The solution is stable."
"Our customers find the self-service feature the most valuable. Control-M offers great value to businesses by providing an option to see different flows and control and orchestrate the sequence of the execution. It is easy to use and integrate with different solutions. It is a good solution that is easy to implement and deliver."
"Security is the most valuable feature of this product."
"The product has been very stable."
"Offers secure file transfers with a fast and efficient protocol for very large files."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides 100% reliability for file transmission. It ensures that files get delivered in a secure manner. When you use Connect:Direct, your file 100% gets delivered to the next delivery location. If the log shows that a file got delivered, it will have all the transmitted data without truncation or other data issues."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is a solution that is on the market for a very long time. There is an integrator that has been developed and evolves every year. On the roadmap, there is always a new integration. For example, it's one of the solutions in the market that out of the box can handle EBICS protocol. The file processing is done very well. By default, there are a lot of configurations that can be customized."
"Automation is the most valuable feature."
"The Security Plus feature of this solution is excellent, and allows you to send encrypted files very securely to remote destinations."
"Their support can be improved. I would like them to provide support in Spanish and have more knowledge."
"This solution could be improved by making it possible to better control GUI when interfacing with other systems."
"One can opt for either a job-based license or a job execution-based license, which sometimes can be troublesome. If the job count exceeds a limit, you may need to procure additional licenses from BMC."
"I believe that the API should be upgraded with security control from the DM. There is Currently no security for the app API solution."
"The only improvement I would suggest is the license pricing should be a little reduced. Apart from that, I don't see anything else as a major concern with the tool right now."
"Its price could be better."
"We're only using the functionality that we need to use. However, we've had an opportunity to work with one application owner here who wanted to do some transfers in the cloud and things like that. I know that there were some challenges on that, but they finally got all that set up. There was a learning curve though."
"We have some issues on the SAP side of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer...So, there are some stability issues when it comes to SAP side."
"Sometimes we face issues and can't figure out the cause of failures."
"This solution cannot be deployed on a root_squash NFS, which limits superuser privileges."
"Technical support is the number one concern."
"They have File Agent, which is an additional utility and a component of Connect:Direct, for automated file transmission. In that utility, there is some issue with the file name. There is a limitation on the file name, and that is being fixed by IBM."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"User interface is not user friendly."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct could improve by adding some of the functionality that some other vendors have. For example, GoAnywhere has call agents, which are small clients that can be installed on the endpoints and can be handled by the central point on the server. If I want to do this with the IBM solution, I have to sell a lot of account addresses. The price could be unprofitable for the customer. There is some small functionality that could be implemented and could be easily done to improve this solution."
More BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is ranked 4th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 21 reviews while Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is ranked 9th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 7 reviews. BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is rated 8.8, while Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer writes "Adaptable, useful file transfer, and has helpful technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct writes "Secure, fast, and 100% reliable". BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, MOVEit, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer, Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT and Control-M, whereas Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, Kiteworks, Aspera Managed File Transfer, Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT and Control-M. See our BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs. Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct report.
See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.