We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and OpCon 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 known for its strength, adaptability, and straightforward setup. It provides management over various operating systems and products, which is advantageous for environments with a blend of outdated and modern technologies. Recent enhancements include web browser accessibility and perspective analytics. OpCon is highly regarded for its versatility, integration abilities, and self-service option. It permits users to automate tasks based on their individual requirements, minimizing mistakes and enhancing productivity. The graphical user interface, database functionality, and on-demand access are also noteworthy attributes.
Automic Workload Automation could improve in out-of-box automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition, file transfer, pricing, and support. OpCon could be enhanced in terms of web-based interface functionality, compatibility, documentation, accessibility, user-side web interface, licensing, support, features, and integration with FICS.
Service and Support: Customers have expressed varying opinions about the customer service for Automic Workload Automation. Some have appreciated the prompt response times and informative knowledge articles, while others have faced challenges in contacting the support team. OpCon's customer service and support have garnered positive feedback, with customers commending the technical support team for their timely assistance and efficient resolutions.
Ease of Deployment: Automic can take anywhere from one to five days to set up, whereas OpCon's setup can be complex but is simplified with the help of SMA consultants. Automic only needs a team of one to three people, while OpCon necessitates close collaboration with SMA and training.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a high setup cost, whereas OpCon is known for being pricey and intricate. Despite this, OpCon is recognized as a cost-effective choice.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation did not present clear ROI figures and was not renewed due to budget reductions. OpCon demonstrated substantial advantages by saving time, minimizing errors, and enhancing productivity, resulting in a strong return on investment.
Comparison Results: OpCon is the preferred choice when compared to Automic Workload Automation. Users appreciate OpCon's flexibility, integration capabilities, self-service feature, and graphical user interface. OpCon allows users to automate tasks according to their specific needs, reducing human error. The customer service and technical support for OpCon are highly regarded, with quick response times and effective solutions.
"I like that Automic Workload Automation has many features compared to other products. There are a lot of good features, and architecture-wise there is a valuable client concept. The architecture and the multi-tenancy is a multi-client concept. That is also useful."
"It is 100% stable. We have no downtime. We have 24/7 production throughout the year."
"The most valuable feature is that I do not have to wait for one job to finish, then manually click on the next one to start. Automation is the best feature."
"The main things that we use it for are job control and batch. For these, it does very well."
"Automic is perfect to work with for a lot of job loads."
"An important feature is the ability to modify PeopleSoft Run Controls at run-time."
"It reduces operational costs and increases quality."
"We have everything in one system."
"The automation part of OpCon is the most valuable for us, with all the core processing. It's really mostly hands-off unless we have failures. In our old days, we'd spend a good part of the day doing processing via manual tasks. We don't have to do any of that any longer."
"The end code response allows us to evaluate how a process finished, set the termination/end code appropriately, and then trigger further processing based on how it ended."
"The stability of this solution is awesome. It's the only product I've ever seen that you can actually build to fix itself if it has a problem. You'll build something and, if you find an issue, you can say, 'Hey, if this happens again, do this to correct it.'"
"The automation of processes is the most valuable feature. One of the major hurdles for us over the last few years, before we found OpCon, was to make our nightly process happen automatically. Being a bank, we have nightly update processes that have to happen for posting transactions, for example, and it was a huge load off our department to have that automated."
"We're also starting to use its Self Service and Solution Manager. My team in the data center and some of the development team use the Self Service. Developers are using the Self Service for upon-request jobs for their testing. They used to have to go through us to schedule testing and now they can just go on and kick it off all they want. They have also really appreciated that they have access to view and/or submit jobs."
"The core system is the most valuable part: being able to view the processes that we've never really been able to view as a whole before. That is super-helpful, as is being alerted when issues arise."
"File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder."
"With a simple click of a button in self-service, the department or the user can complete his/her job."
"I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution."
"The only thing that we would like improved is the FTP agent. It only supports SOCKS proxy, and we would like it to also support an HTTP proxy."
"The direction in which the UI is going is concerning to me. It does not offer the security context we would need to implement future versions. While I see benefit in the Web UI, the security it would lack in separating a user's experience from an administrator's experience is an issue for us. MFA functionality is required since we're dealing with connectivity to the POS and for PCI/SOX compliance."
"From my point of view, the current product needs more stability."
"There are some problems when using the new interface."
"Our recent experience with technical support has not been good, because it took a couple of months to get feedback. Traces and reports were sent, but were not analyzed for at least two months before providing feedback, and they did not give the right traces. This took two months to find out, so that was not too good."
"ServiceNow creates problems with the Automic entry of the connector, so the stability could be a little bit better with this product."
"We have some problems with updates where some functions are changed, so you have to check your whole system to see if everything is still running. The update process for us is around two months of testing and one day of updates."
"There is room for improvement needed around setting up the calendars and frequencies. I would like more flexibility in what jobs run. Sometimes, with frequencies, I can't find what I want to without putting a little more labor into it."
"There is one feature that has been a difficult problem, and right now, OpCon can't do it. I'm not sure if it should be expected to, but we have tried to get it to where it could start a process on an external database."
"Some additional logging-information reporting would also help. They have all the information there but you still have to search around and look back. It's not right there for you, where you click and can get the reporting. You have to know the system and do some additional searches. So reporting is another area that they can build on by simplifying it."
"The calendar interface and the frequency interface is a very powerful, yet complex, section of OpCon in which all our staff have made mistakes. They have implemented what they believed was logically correct and then afterward discovered that their logic was flawed because OpCon did it a different way. That part, which is incredibly useful, is also incredibly dangerous. The interface or the ability to directly do more functions within the frequency definitely has room for expansion. As good as it is, it can be a lot better."
"The initial setup was fairly complex."
"The learning curve could be shorter. The problem is that it's difficult to simplify a product without taking away functionality. I would love to see OpCon become a little easier to grasp. However, my concern is that making things easier isn't always better for the product. If they can keep the integrity of the product while making it easier to learn, that would be an area of improvement."
"The UI refresh rate is really bad and needs improvement."
"It would be nice to go to a fully thin client."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while OpCon is ranked 9th in Workload Automation with 56 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while OpCon is rated 9.2. 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 OpCon writes "Gives us the ability to schedule dependent jobs across different mainframes". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and Redwood RunMyJobs, whereas OpCon is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, UiPath and VisualCron. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. OpCon 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.
Hello Rick, I couldn't help you with the Appwork applications manager.
On the other hand, one thing that is certain that
we are satisfied to have migrated all our jobs processing under OpCon (120 000
jobs/days) since 2018.
We have improved in terms
of service quality, we have made progress in the automation of our business
process and we benefit from more functionalities and reduces operating costs.
OpCon is a true
Enterprise Scheduler.
I hope this will help you in your
research.
Ian,
It isn't that AWA wont work. It comes down to support from another vendor. The vendor isn't currently familiar with AWA, so they are taking classes, and will be able to support it in the future
We are about to start to use AWA and was wondering why that platform will not work for you going forward?
@NickWilcox you recently reviewed OpCon - would you be willing to share your experiences with @Rick Murray to help him with his decision? @reviewer1166826 maybe you can give some insight into the pros and cons of AppWorx?
I am sorry because cannot help you. We have no experience with Appworx Application Manager.