We performed a comparison between Control-M and Oracle Process Cloud Service based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."
"As soon as you have an issue, a ticket is created and the tech support is quite responsive."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"The best part about this product is that it has a lot of features. Control-M doesn't limit us and we can use it for a lot of things."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice."
"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."
"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."
"The tool's most valuable feature is knowing the KPIs and SLAs. This means you can see who's responsible for approving or rejecting requests. You'll know which employees are slow to take action, so you can see who's being lazy. You get a report at the month's or year's end to see how active employees are and if they support the system. This helps make things faster and easier for everyone. Tracking activity is the main point, so you can see how employees use the system."
"The performance could be better. Control-M Enterprise Manager tends to slow the system down even on a server with a six-core processor and 32 gigabytes RAM. The console is Java-based, so maybe OpenJDK 16 or 17 would be a performance improvement."
"The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT."
"They can give more predefined plug-ins so that we don't have to create them."
"There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go."
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data."
"There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly."
"I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product."
"The tool was perfect on-prem, but issues cropped up when it transitioned to the cloud. Some features, such as event listeners, have been suspended or deprecated, causing inconvenience for users who relied on them for sending tasks via WhatsApp or SMS."
Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while Oracle Process Cloud Service is ranked 16th in Process Automation with 1 review. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Oracle Process Cloud Service is rated 10.0. 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 Oracle Process Cloud Service writes "Helps to transform an organization from a paper-based system to a paperless one using a workflow engine". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Oracle Process Cloud Service is most compared with .
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.
