We performed a comparison between Control-M and UiPath Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"The ability to dynamically predict batch run time is so valuable."
"We use Control-M for maintenance on our Oracle and SQL Server databases. It automates maintenance on packages, including standard procedures on the databases themselves, snapshots, checking integrity, verifying the RDBMS of the databases, etc. It ensures they aren't clogged and that they are running smoothly and that there aren't any jobs stuck, eating up the performance of the server or any of the CPU cores."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
"The Control-M interface is good for creating, monitoring, and ensuring the delivery of files as part of our data pipeline. There's a wealth of information in both the full client, as well as the web interface that they have. Both are very easy to use and provide all the necessary material to understand how to do various tasks. The help feature is very useful and informative and everything is very easy to understand."
"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."
"We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."
"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."
"UiPath Orchestrator is a stable solution."
"The centralized dashboard and asset management in UiPath Orchestrator have proven valuable in enhancing operational efficiency."
"I like UiPath Orchestrator's screen capture feature."
"The platform serves as a valuable tool for orchestrating solutions within an organization."
"It was very simple to use and allowed us to easily record and manage activities."
"UiPath Orchestrator is a user-friendly solution."
"One standout feature I like in UiPath Orchestrator is the scheduling capability."
"It allows for the segregation of users, ensuring each user has access to specific environments based on their roles."
"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."
"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."
"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 next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client."
"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."
"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."
"After we complete FTP jobs, those FTP jobs will be cleared from the Control-M schedule after the noon refresh. So, I struggle to find out where those jobs are saved. Then, we need to request execution of the FTP jobs again. If there could be an option to show the logs, which have been previously completed, that would help us. I can find all other job logs from the server side, but FTP job logs. Maybe I am missing the feature, or if it is not there, it could be added."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"We encounter errors while configuring and integrating the product with other vendors."
"The product must conduct more promotional activities and webinars."
"It's a bit difficult to connect to the licenses."
"The vendor should provide free certification to their partners."
"It is challenging to accurately define text within images for the product."
"The solution’s licensing cost is high and could be improved."
"The credential vault is generic and does not have process categorization. The tool needs to arrange a Customer Success Manager for support. It should also improve the credential manager and integrate a customized form of retrieving the details. There should be more dashboards as well."
"One area for improvement in UiPath Orchestrator is enhancing automation for exceptional cases."
Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews while UiPath Orchestrator is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while UiPath Orchestrator is rated 8.2. 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 UiPath Orchestrator writes "A user-friendly and reliable tool that is easy to implement". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas UiPath Orchestrator is most compared with . See our Control-M vs. UiPath Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
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.
