We performed a comparison between IBM 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: IBM Workload Automation offers the option for clients to vote on and suggest new features, supports triggering jobs in multiple nodes, and provides a convenient way to monitor batch applications. Tidal Automation stands out with its efficient job scheduler, user-friendly interface, flexibility, and seamless integration with various systems.
IBM Workload Automation has addressed performance concerns and improved navigation, however, there are still challenges with job dependencies and daily schedule updates. The solution lacks stability, reporting visibility, and integration capabilities. Tidal Automation has a busy user interface and a complex pricing model, which may result in a steep learning curve. It needs better QA testing, enhanced job migration, and production statistics reporting. The solution does not offer AI capabilities, advanced reporting, or customization options.
Service and Support: IBM Workload Automation is praised for its technical support, particularly their lab advocacy program which provides in-depth code support. However, customers may face challenges in identifying the source of certain issues. Tidal Automation's customer service and support has a responsive and knowledgeable team. They are commended for their ability to address problems quickly and provide solutions, as well as their impressive product knowledge. However, there are occasional mentions of lower-priority items getting overlooked.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for IBM Workload Automation can be difficult, particularly for individuals who are not familiar with IBM tools or application development. The setup for Tidal Automation is described as simple and uncomplicated, only necessitating a small number of servers and a database.
Pricing: The cost of setting up IBM Workload Automation is determined by the customer's contract and can vary based on the number of agents installed. Users consider the pricing of Tidal Automation to be reasonable and consistent, without a significant increase even with increased usage.
ROI: Based on available insights, IBM Workload Automation lacks user feedback on ROI determination. Tidal Automation garners favorable reviews highlighting cost savings, enhanced efficiency, and superior risk management.
Comparison Results: Tidal Automation is favored over IBM Workload Automation because of its simple setup process, user-friendly interface, and dependable job scheduler. Users like how Tidal Automation offers a consolidated view and allows real-time monitoring, as well as the flexibility to run jobs on various servers.
"The technical support is great, the product is easy-to-use, and it is stable."
"The whole product is valuable because it is a tool for batch automation."
"Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"The DWC, when configured correctly, is a great GUI tool to provide Self-Service Scheduling capabilities to the user community."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"It's easy to use and easy to administer, and it's very flexible."
"With other tools, you do not have the ability to schedule jobs on their own. You need to create a group and then assign everything to that group. Only then will the job be able to execute. In Tidal, you can schedule a single job and there is no need to create a group. That's what I like the most."
"It's the most efficient tool in doing repetitive tasks and saves a lot of time with minimum possibility of error."
"The versatility of being able to run on many different types of servers is valuable. There is also a versatility of different services that you could run jobs on. It's highly versatile. You can run a lot of different types of scripts on a lot of different types of servers. It interfaces with all of them."
"With the varied features in the varied adapters provided, we use Tidal Enterprise Scheduler because we want everything to be scheduled in one place. Tidal provides that for us with its tools and varying platforms in our organization. Tidal provides all the connectors to the platforms. This is very useful because we don't want to look for another scheduler for scheduling certain jobs. We don't want to look at those schedules manually between platforms."
"We use the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads. That's the biggest use for us and that's the biggest advantage."
"The job dependency is something that you cannot have in a regular, simple cron job or simple scheduler dependency. The event-driven jobs are core for us, as we really need that. Therefore, we really need Tidal with its ability to run thousands of jobs per day."
"Tidal Automation is very efficient and can quickly automate most manual and repetitive tasks."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"It should support other schedulers that aren't IBM products."
"Scalability-wise, it can be a little bit challenging."
"The UI might have the potential to provide a more polished and user-centric encounter, promoting seamless engagements and simplifying the navigation process for individuals interacting with the software."
"The solution needs more advanced reporting and data visualization capabilities to enable deeper analysis of job performance and trends."
"One area for improvement is the command-line interface and the API to bulk-load jobs. It's a little bit kludgy, but we still manage without it. They're working on it and it's getting better all the time. In addition, the documentation for their API for creating jobs needs to be updated. It's a bit of a learning curve."
"The current user interface of Tidal Software is functional. However, it can be improved to make it more intuitive and user-friendly."
"I'm still hoping with Explorer to be able to see end-to-end job streams. That's not really something that's easy to see today in the web client. However, I haven't worked with Explorer yet. One of the things that we have found frustrating is not being able to see an end-to-end job stream across multiple applications within Tidal. We use jobs for that right now, but I have high hopes that we'll be able to see that in Explorer."
"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."
"The GUI, the graphical user interface, gets a little bit busy."
"When we patch to the next version, there is often a little thing that breaks. It has rarely been a big deal, but I always seem to have to follow up on one tiny issue. It would help if they had some better QA testing of their patches."
IBM Workload Automation is ranked 13th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". 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". IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and BMC Compuware ThruPut Manager, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, ActiveBatch by Redwood and Rocket Zeke. See our IBM 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.