We performed a comparison between AutoSys 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: AutoSys Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ability to handle large workloads, its user-friendly interface, efficient performance, and continuous availability. It particularly shines in efficiently managing job sequencing, executing real-time batch tasks, and seamlessly connecting various software processes. Tidal Automation distinguishes itself with its exceptional job scheduling capabilities, consolidated and intuitive interface, versatile job execution options, and seamless integration with different systems.
AutoSys needs enhancements in cloud service integration, reporting and performance comparison, Linux compatibility, migration capabilities, monitoring, advanced features, and workload window management. Tidal Automation would benefit from improvements in result interpretation, pricing model simplification, user interface, AI and machine learning capabilities, integration, job dependency management, security, performance and scalability, customization, collaboration, alerting configurations, and adaptability.
Service and Support: The customer service for Tidal Automation is commendable for its impressive product knowledge and willingness to assist with integration. However, there are occasional mentions of lower-priority items getting lost in the mix for Tidal Automation. AutoSys support is sufficient and capable with standardized approaches.
Ease of Deployment: The setup for AutoSys Workload Automation is described as quick and hassle-free, taking approximately 10 minutes or less. Tidal Automation's setup is easy and straightforward, however, it requires a significantly longer time of around three weeks to complete.
Pricing: AutoSys Workload Automation has a diverse range of setup costs, including a yearly subscription and an annual license. Tidal Automation is praised for its fair and predictable pricing, offering transparent licensing and the option for additional adapters to cater to specific job needs.
ROI: AutoSys Workload Automation offers benefits such as time savings, improved reliability, scalability, and enhanced visibility and control. Tidal Automation provides advantages like cost savings, increased efficiency, productivity, risk management, and seamless integration.
Comparison Results: AutoSys Workload Automation is the preferred choice when compared to Tidal Automation. Users appreciate AutoSys for its simple setup, scalability, user-friendly interface, and consistent availability. Its valuable features include file transfer protocol and file watcher. Additionally, AutoSys is commended for its reliability and promptness in executing tasks.
"This solution enables us to improve our daily processing times. We can do everything faster than before we used this solution."
"We don't have to manually run things anymore. We can have the work that a team of 50 people would do, all inside of one platform."
"It is very valuable for us when we are trying to arrange or orchestrate jobs into a system. It is helpful for triggering jobs for a scheduled task."
"Automation of patch process."
"AutoSys Workload Automation is scalable."
"It has allowed us to automate many of the functions of our operations staff. For instance, we had production control staff spending two hours a day entering date parms into our daily business processes. And now, CA Workload Automation does it for us."
"The solution has been stable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"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."
"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."
"From a management standpoint, when using the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads, I've never had a problem with the application. It's very interactive, especially with the different security levels that they offer."
"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."
"Tidal Automation’s most valuable feature is customization. It can work and connect with any app."
"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 and cross-application workloads. That's one of the core reasons we chose it. It's one of a few things in the industry that can be used for cross-platform integration."
"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."
"They could do better supporting it. They have too many of the same type of products, so sometimes it doesn't get as much attention as it should."
"CA Workload Automation is not part of CA's strategic vision going forward."
"A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that."
"The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
"I would like to see two-factor authentication, since you see a lot of companies in the news for security breaches. That is a really big thing for us."
"The solution does not have a friendly subscription model because it forces users to take a five-year subscription simultaneously, charging millions of dollars."
"I am not sure whether it is our limitation or a tool limitation because we haven't yet explored it, but whenever we look for different types of reporting, we have some limitations in getting those. It could be because of the way we have set it up internally in our enterprise, but it would be helpful if we can customize the reporting features and some of the alerts that can go out. When we connect enterprise systems, each one looks for a different use case, and if we can get different types of reporting, it will be helpful."
"To better fit their unique needs, the solution should give more customization options."
"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."
"Some users have complained that the initial setup process is complicated and time-consuming, while others have suggested that the software could offer more freedom in customizing processes."
"Tidal Software interface could be more intuitive and user-friendly."
"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 drill-down into details using the Graphical Views feature is a bit difficult and not that helpful. If you want to go into the details, you have to go to the Job Activity. Graphical Views is not that easy for getting that kind of information."
"From an administrative point of view, I wouldn't give really high marks to the solution. I actually entertained getting the JAWS application at one point. One of the shortcomings with the scheduler is the reporting capabilities. At least at the time, JAWS was the best that they had for a third-party integration. I think they've got things in the pipeline to help alleviate that gap."
"The GUI, the graphical user interface, gets a little bit busy."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". 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". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automic Workload Automation and OpCon, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, ActiveBatch by Redwood and Rocket Zeke. See our AutoSys 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.