We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Automic Workload Automation is highly praised for its strong and scalable nature, as well as its easy implementation. Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition is known for its impressive job definition capabilities, effective error handling, and seamless integration with different systems.
Automic can improve in several areas such as pre-configured automation sets, language compatibility, features, user interface, web-based version, file transfer management, pricing, and SaaS deployment. Redwood has the potential to enhance reporting functionalities, address minor problems, enhance monitoring and alert services, incorporate machine learning capabilities, and offer more comprehensive documentation.
Service and Support: Customers have had differing experiences with Automic Workload Automation's customer service. Some appreciate the prompt response and informative knowledge articles, while others have encountered challenges in contacting the support team. Redwood Software's customer service is generally regarded as satisfactory and beneficial, although there is still room for enhancement.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Automic can take anywhere from one to five days, depending on the size of the project. A small team of one to three individuals is typically enough for this task. Redwood Software's setup is known to be complicated and time-consuming because of its large number of jobs and the complexity of the existing system.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a high setup cost. Redwood Software has a distinct pricing model based on the number of job executions, making it more affordable compared to competitors such as Control-M and UC4.
ROI: The lack of specific ROI numbers and higher costs led to the decision not to renew Automic Workload Automation. Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition has demonstrated positive outcomes with a 10% return on investment.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred choice when compared to Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition. Users praise Automic for its strong capabilities, scalability, easy implementation, and comprehensive features. Automic excels in providing control across multiple operating systems and products, which is beneficial for environments with a combination of old and new technologies.
"The ability to be able to automate more of our business processes."
"The functionality is great, the scripting language is very powerful. They can adapt to most use cases. Very good community of different companies and a user base so when we have problems we can go to other people."
"We have two nodes that are highly available. You can add new nodes if you need that. You can take a node, a total node, down and still be operating fine. It has a lot of scaling to it."
"Workload Automation's most valuable features are perspective analytics and coding."
"We have everything in one system."
"The workflow allows us to integrate multiple applications into one flow and come up with a business result."
"We use it to automate our business."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler."
"Redwood is of value to our organization due to of its ease of use and the ability to automate and orchestrate any platform that we utilize today."
"REL expressions are quite helpful for setting up the preconditions."
"This program works with every browser."
"Redwood manages all complex job workflow processes."
"This tool helps us to monitor the job related to SAP modules."
"There won't be a memory outage issue, as it uses its own server/ECC memory only."
"We can create and test micro-workflows to find defects sooner."
"One of Redwood Software's features that I liked was its event-driven automation, which allows IT teams to respond to real-time events, alerts, and notifications from numerous systems."
"From my point of view, the current product needs more stability."
"There are some scripting elements that could be added."
"The new UI feels unready. It makes your browsers crash."
"There are certain jobs that are triggered one after another. It would be helpful to have a more user-friendly way of seeing how these jobs are connecting from one server to another."
"There were many bugs in the last version. For example, we could only use capital letters for searching for agent names. Also, we had a problem with ONE Automation where we couldn't use the PGA and SGA in Oracle Databases for resolving RAM because the last version didn't have this capability."
"Our users are used to the flatline of the UC4. When we introduced the AVI, they are not interested nor motivated to use it."
"Some of the usual features, like calendar details, are now not there."
"Every time we have an upgrade for a new version, we have stability problems, because the versions are not as good as they should be."
"The addition of machine learning capabilities could help Redwood Workload Automation Software better predict job and workflow performance, detect anomalies, and optimize operations based on historical data."
"Enhancing the user interface would make it more appealing and accessible to a wide range of users."
"The reports are downloaded in .CAR file format, which makes it difficult to convert to an Excel file."
"The dashboard provided can be made more visually appealing and could include more critical data that would help associates in one glance get the required information."
"The user interface of Redwood can be improved a bit to make it more user-friendly and interesting."
"We'd like to see an integration with ServiceNow to raise the tickets/incidents in ServiceNow."
"The only issue at first was that we had to manually delete or raise the event in order to run some of the events and wait for jobs, even if the file was kept at the correct AL11 position."
"The price wise, it is not affordable. When we compare with other industry leading softwares and even the same scale, there are certain softwares that can compete with Redwood, but Redwood is very highly paced.So it is more SAP friendly, I would say, at this point. Since it was owned by SAP for very long time, they have made it SAP friendly. But if you look at the tool as a enterprise tool. Like, in general, it is not really that great as a tool. So you can you have better options when you couple it with SAP. But if you would like to control your enterprise level applications, anything after that, like, Azure AWS and things like that Oracle."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while Redwood RunMyJobs is ranked 3rd in Workload Automation with 30 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Redwood RunMyJobs is rated 9.6. 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 Redwood RunMyJobs writes "Simple to use, increases CPU speed, and reduces the cost of machine time". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and MOVEit, whereas Redwood RunMyJobs is most compared with Control-M, Stonebranch, Tidal by Redwood, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch by Redwood. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. Redwood RunMyJobs 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.
