Control-M vs OpenText Operations Orchestration comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BMC Logo
4,620 views|1,664 comparisons
98% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
751 views|542 comparisons
91% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Control-M and OpenText Operations Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly.""Ability to handle files remotely through the advanced file transfer feature.""In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M.""Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important.""Promotions between environments, as well as local, mass update, versioning, and self-service.""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.""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 feature we use most in Control-M is related to the file transfer module. It is quite advanced compared to the other tools like Automate, etc. The new version which has come of same MFT has a lot of advanced features which makes it very easy to work with. There is less need for written programs and more GUI-based stuff."

More Control-M Pros →

"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both.""It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options.""The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."

More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pros →

Cons
"The history module only contains a maximum of 10 days, but we would like to have access to more. For example, it would be helpful to have 30 days or two months of history available.""Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility.""A lot of the areas of improvement revolve around Automation API because that area is constantly evolving. It is constantly changing, and it is constantly being updated. There are some bugs that are introduced from one version to the next. So, the regression testing doesn't seem to capture some of the bugs that have been fixed in prior versions, and those bugs are then reintroduced in later versions.""The infrastructure could be improved.""Consider adding a mobile application for remote management.""For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working.""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.""I would like to see more audit report templates added, and perhaps more customizability in terms of reporting."

More Control-M Cons →

"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues.""The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases.""The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."

More OpenText Operations Orchestration Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Compare to other tools Pricing and licensing was more. It should be decrease."
  • "BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."
  • "we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive."
  • "We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."
  • "As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost."
  • "We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing."
  • "This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations."
  • "It works on task-based licensing."
  • More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "I do not have experience with the pricing or licensing of the product."
  • "The cost is very high compared to anything else available."
  • More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and… more »
    Top Answer:First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
    Top Answer:They are expensive. If we were a small company, it would be complicated because we have to have strong sales and operations to be able to afford a tool of this level. Being a large company, the… more »
    Top Answer:The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases.
    Top Answer:The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization.
    Ranking
    4th
    out of 66 in Process Automation
    Views
    4,620
    Comparisons
    1,664
    Reviews
    21
    Average Words per Review
    1,562
    Rating
    9.0
    19th
    out of 66 in Process Automation
    Views
    751
    Comparisons
    542
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    186
    Rating
    9.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    Micro Focus Operations Orchestration, Operations Orchestration, HPOO, HPE Operations Orchestration
    Learn More
    Overview

    Control-M simplifies application and data workflow orchestration on premises or as a service. It makes it easy to build, define, schedule, manage, and monitor production workflows, ensuring visibility, reliability, and improving SLAs.

    • Accelerate new business applications into production—by embedding workflow orchestration into your CI/CD pipeline
    • Scale Dev and Ops collaboration, with a Jobs-as-Code approach
    • Simplify workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform integrations
    • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster, managing big data workflows in a scalable way
    • Take control of your file transfer operations with integrated, intelligent file movement and visibility

    OpenText Operations Orchestration (OO) automates, integrates, and orchestrates any IT process, on cloud or off. Automate using low-code/no-code workflow authoring options. Integrate with an API rich, extensible platform. Centrally orchestrate powerful, scalable workflows.

    With OO you can automate and orchestrate infrastructure automation and IT processes from service fulfillment to incident remediation, cloud service delivery, and disaster recovery.

    Operations Orchestration offers the tools needed to provide enterprise wide orchestration capabilities:

    • Design automation workflows with a low-code/no-code designer canvas, content library, and API generator wizards.
    • Govern your automation in one place and centrally orchestrate powerful, scalable workflows in large, high availability environments.
    • Schedule workflows and make sure that SLAs are met and workflows execution happens when you need it.
    • Expose REST APIs to programmatically invoke orchestration from any external source.
    • Automate difficult interfaces with RPA robots that mimic screen based human actions.
    • Follow business and operational metrics to understand the value and the health of your orchestration environment.
    • Expose orchestration scenarios as services to your end users in an easy to use Self-Service catalog.

    Operations Orchestration offers the following components:

    Sample Customers
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    Casablanca INT, Internet Initiative Japan, Railway Information Systems, Samsung SDS, and Turkcell.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Retailer9%
    Healthcare Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm29%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Insurance Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider21%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Insurance Company7%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm29%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise78%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise4%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    Control-M vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 19th in Process Automation with 24 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8. 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 OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Camunda, Microsoft System Center Orchestrator, BigFix and Appian. See our Control-M vs. OpenText Operations Orchestration report.

    See our list of best Process Automation vendors.

    We monitor all Process 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.