We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and Tidal Automation 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 valued for its strong performance, ability to handle large workloads, and user-friendly implementation. It provides comprehensive control over various systems and products. Tidal Automation is particularly praised for its efficient job scheduler and advanced real-time monitoring features.
Automic could enhance its out-of-box automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition features, file transfer management, pricing, and SaaS deployment. Tidal could benefit from improvements in its graphical user interface, pricing model, cloud/hybrid solution, QA testing, job migration, reporting, artificial intelligence capabilities, integration, and user-friendliness.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation's customer service has received varied feedback, with some customers appreciating prompt responses and useful knowledge articles, while others have encountered challenges in contacting the support team. Tidal Automation's customer service is highly regarded for its responsiveness, expertise, and consistent resolution of issues.
Ease of Deployment: Automic's initial setup duration and complexity can differ, lasting anywhere from one to five days based on the project scale and implementation. Tidal Automation's initial setup is described as simple and effortless, necessitating approximately three weeks along with a few servers and a database.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation and Tidal Automation were compared for their setup cost. Users found Automic Workload Automation to be more cost-effective and user-friendly compared to Tidal Automation. They praised Automic for its efficiency in setting up automation processes without incurring excessive expenses.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation is seen as an added cost without clear ROI figures, while Tidal Automation has demonstrated positive ROI through cost savings, enhanced efficiency, and better risk management. Tidal Automation also excels in seamless integration and fulfilling automation needs.
Comparison Results: Tidal Automation emerges as the preferred choice compared to Automic Workload Automation. The setup process for Tidal Automation is described as straightforward and easy, taking approximately three weeks, whereas Automic's setup can take anywhere from one to five days. Users highly appreciate Tidal Automation's job scheduler and single pane of glass interface, which make workload management and monitoring simple.
"It's easy to use. When you schedule jobs, if you can speak English you can schedule them easily and correctly. Also, there's a lot of flexibility because the product allows you to do many tasks, in multiple ways, so you can choose the way that works best for your environment."
"I like the script engine of CA, where you can build everything you want."
"It's easy to train other people. A new developer could come in and learn it very quickly."
"The solution's technical support has always been excellent."
"There are a lot of features which help us get a stable application. It is easy to have a stable production line, because this app supports us very well."
"We have seen a cost improvement from it."
"It saves my customers time, money, resources, and efficiency."
"It has greatly increased our efficiencies and productivity, and reduced the amount of human interaction required."
"Tidal Workload Automation Software provides the ability to quickly adapt to changing business requirements."
"Tidal helps administrators and users to see the information that is relevant to them in that single pane of glass. They can see jobs running, they can see job history, and they can see job progression. If you look at alternatives like Airflow and clouds, you'd have to design your own UI to monitor the progress of the different jobs that you've created in Airflow. So Tidal is huge for us."
"It saves times due to automation. With some files, we do hundreds a day for a particular vendor. This would be hard to do manually. Also, the speed at which we can do this is excellent."
"We use the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads. The solution’s ability to manage and monitor these workloads is very easy and accurate. We have file dependencies for running jobs. The job does not start until a file exists on a completely different server, then where the job will run. So, it is cross systems."
"It is intended to enable large-scale automation environments, making it appropriate for companies with complicated processes and big data volumes."
"It's the most efficient tool in doing repetitive tasks and saves a lot of time with minimum possibility of error."
"Tidal integrates with other third-party systems, which makes it easy to connect and exchange data."
"The Graphical Views feature is also very good for helping us to understand a job stream. It's great for providing a visual overview of the status of a workflow, especially the Critical Path view. That is one of our favorites."
"ServiceNow creates problems with the Automic entry of the connector, so the stability could be a little bit better with this product."
"I hope in the next release that they will solve all the bugs which they have found in development."
"I would like a good AWI in the next release. The AWI is not fully functional at this time."
"After the merger, it is getting more American. Now, they do not have support in French and have limited German documentation. This is a critical problem for companies who have older generations who did not have English in school."
"It seems still very technical to get the full features out... Once you get to some of the leadership levels, such as myself, you don't have time to go digging into it. It would be nice to have some additional performance features such as reporting, analytics."
"We would like to have some features with the AWI with the founding technique, which cannot currently be delivered."
"The frustration that we have probably had in the past is where CA tools run for a period of time, then they get deprecated, and you have to build a new one."
"For the user interface of version 12.1, I cannot find a lot of utilities and objects from previous versions, making me change my habits. This is not good."
"Initially, it is complicated to understand the functionalities as there is limited product documentation."
"I would like more involvement with the cloud."
"One thing I would like to see improved is that, currently, when an action is executed and finishes in Tidal, it's marked as either "success" or "failure." I would like more options that would flag a job according to multiple options, rather than just "good" or bad"... Tidal has told us that it's possible to do so through the product or with a workaround."
"My complaint about their pricing model is that every year or every time technology changes or somebody has a new requirement, it usually means that I can schedule that with Tidal, but I would need another adapter. So, every time there is a change, I need a different adapter that I don't have. That's why it is harder to plan for Tidal growth because you have to buy a new adapter every time."
"Understanding and using Tidal Automation could be overwhelming for someone with minimal programming language."
"The biggest improvement they need to work on is doing better QA checks before they release new patches and service packs. We do find that you can't trust getting the new product right away, as they have to get some bug fixes out. They do tend to have some bugs in the first iteration."
"Their software installation and update process could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure they're working on that, but that's definitely an area where it could be streamlined a lot. There's still a lot of manual work that you have to do with the schedule when you deploy masters or do the agents."
"The product’s UI is outdated. They should work on this particular area."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. 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 Tidal by Redwood writes "Great visibility with a single pane of glass and a low learning curve". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and MOVEit, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs and Fortra's JAMS. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. Tidal by Redwood 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.
