We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and BMC TrueSight Server Automation 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."The main things that we use it for are job control and batch. For these, it does very well."
"We can take something from crontab, something that's very nitty-gritty and low-level, and be able to put it into a nice interface, and be able to track it at every junction along the way, add alerting, interdependencies."
"The company can expand with this product. Every time I bring in new ideas for solutions, it is with this product."
"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline."
"The user interface is very simple and straightforward."
"We are able to control and change our processes when necessary."
"Unlike other Orchestration or Workload Automation tools, Automic Workload Automation stands out as a versatile single solution capable of handling various use cases such as business process automation, workload automation, service orchestration, and PR automation. There's no need for additional tools to make it compatible with your specific use case. Automic Workload Automation can handle it all without requiring any sideline tools to be installed."
"With the automation, we are able to provide background services. It is very economical and not possible to do manually."
"The most important feature is the schedulings."
"BMC support is great. They usually can answer any of our questions in a short amount of time and solve our most complex issues."
"Technical support is good."
"The ability to script and create BL packages to perform various functions. This makes automating our environment relatively easy to do."
"The best feature of the solution is patch automation."
"Can standardize patching and deployments across affiliates."
"BladeLogic lets users view the filesystem with minimal authorization to the server."
"The solution is stable."
"When there's an error or a problem, the automation part of it could be easily programmed to escalate it up to the developers or whoever is going to work on it. We had to home-grow that within the product because third-party products are so expensive."
"The pricing has the potential to be high."
"With every new version, things that would previously work, Automic breaks them. So, we have to report the new bugs. Therefore, every time when we patch the system, there is usually a new bug or a feature that was working, then it stops working."
"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
"ServiceNow creates problems with the Automic entry of the connector, so the stability could be a little bit better with this product."
"The only thing that we would like improved is the FTP agent. It only supports SOCKS proxy, and we would like it to also support an HTTP proxy."
"Most of our issues are related to the system, not the job scheduling, such as, bugs and unexpected downtime of the application or database."
"From my point of view, the current product needs more stability."
"I would like to see more container integration in the next release of this solution."
"TrueSight falls short when we are trying to gather large amounts of data from multiple servers. We need to do these tasks manually because there is no option to populate the data and export it to Excel, which is required. For example, let's say I'm trying to find out how many patches are missing on the servers and which ones have been installed. It's hard to automatically pull each server's data in an Excel format."
"The number of APIs available within the tool needs improvement. At the moment, we have a couple of different scanning tools used within the organization, but only one of those is integrated back into Server Automation. There is another tool that they use in another part of the business where it doesn't have an out-of-the-box adaptor for it. We would have to go and create or develop something bespoke to be able to integrate it with that scanning tool. Whereas, with the other scanning tool, there was an API available. To make it easier, I would like to have more APIs available for different scanning tools within that line of business."
"Without any knowledge of the product, we used the KB articles to start working. As a result, we definitely did not have full knowledge of BMC BladeLogic... They need to provide a minimum of knowledge with training on YouTube or somewhere else."
"A better CLI Database cleanup tool would help us with our regular maintenance of BladeLogic Server Automation."
"Provisioning needs to be more user-friendly. We were using BladeLogic for provisioning, but due to a lot of issues and complications, we had to stop using provisioning with this tool."
"The setup of this suite is very complicated. It needs to be simplified."
"There is no other functionality available to patch the containers that we need to include."
More BMC TrueSight Server Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while BMC TrueSight Server Automation is ranked 12th in Configuration Management with 18 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while BMC TrueSight Server Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Server Automation writes "Easy to deploy, automatic patching, and scalable". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and AppWorx Workload Automation, whereas BMC TrueSight Server Automation is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, BigFix, Red Hat Satellite, Microsoft Configuration Manager and HashiCorp Terraform.
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.
