We performed a comparison between Control-M and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite 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."Speeds up processes and automated tasks."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."
"Our ability to integrate with many different solutions has been invaluable. The new approach of the automation API and jobs-as-code is also valuable."
"The product has improved dramatically over the years; it offers a lot in terms of features and capabilities and integration with third-party tools. A wide range of models available with the product is critical in reducing manual and mundane work such as custom script writing. This saves significant amounts of time and, by association, money for the organization."
"The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the features and perform various tasks."
"We can set up automated email notifications to the programmers or the whole team for a particular job. It helps save time because we're not consistently looking at the job to see if it has ended or failed."
"Most valuable feature would be the ability to detect and notify when a process has not completed successfully."
"It's the reliability. And the message tracking is quite good, where we can go in and see if we have an issue."
"The tool's performance doesn't get affected by transformation loads. You can write any number of rules, filtering criteria, transformations, etc."
"We can use it to script and monitor processes."
"One valuable feature is the scalability. We have not had to add processing power or hardware since we installed it. Also, we are able to create and deploy maps to migrate from another EDI platform very quickly."
"The solution helps us automate processes, more on the insurance side. Where they used to have to babysit monthly files, because of size, they don't have to do that with SEEBURGER BIS. They just run the monthly process. Files get collected, translated, and sent to the proper systems, so the babysitting is gone."
"One of the things that SEEBURGER always touts is their ability to do "any to any" formatting... it doesn't matter if you want to take a CSV file or an XML file or a flat file or a PDF file or a structure EDI file; you can transform it from one format to another - any to any or even to the same format - which is a really nice feature."
"The platform has been very consistent and responsive."
"We haven't had any issues with scaling."
"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."
"I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it."
"The stability of Control-M has Not been great. A big thing we've been trying to work on with BMC is observability. Modern applications should be observable and resilient, but we're finding that sometimes Control-M is not very resilient and many times Control-M is not very observable."
"I've never been very successful when researching ways to utilize Batch Impact Manager. It's a tool to set up dummy jobs in your job flow and it's supposed to come back to you and say, 'Okay, for this job flow, you are 50 percent complete at a certain point in time'...I would like things like Batch Impact Manager to be a little more user-friendly, out-of-the-box."
"Right now, Control-M is the leader in EMA analysis, which is similar to Gartner. However, clients want to invest in a strong technology, and therefore this product needs to keep up with the high expectations set for it."
"I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product."
"The biggest improvement they could have is better QA testing before releases come out the door."
"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."
"The integration is not so excellent. While I'm not saying there is a problem, there is no pattern. When we start a new project, we have to work with new people and processes every time. The technical side of their system is very good, but their change process is not repeatable. It needs to be rebuilt each time."
"A person whom I work with, and is not very technical, found the setup complex, as there are a lot of steps."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"I don't think the scalability of the solution is that great because they have tied the solution to their named nodes and it does not allow scalability like some of the cloud products allow."
"I would like there to be a feature that could handle the limited server."
"The BIS Front End needs a little bit of refreshing, especially when it comes to setting up new trading partners and trading partner agreements or transactions. It can be a bit clumsy to copy and rename and then go in and modify."
"We occasionally get ZIP files. Sometimes the ZIP file has one file inside of it, and sometimes the ZIP file might have 30 files inside of it. We have been working with SEEBURGER to enhance their PKUNZIP process to be able to unzip multiple files in a single workflow instead of just one file. This is still something that is in process."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Control-M is ranked 2nd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 110 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 14th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 37 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. 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 SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and Microsoft Azure API Management. See our Control-M vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite 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.
