We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and JSCAPE by Redwood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of the most valuable features is the job templates. If we need to create an FTP job, we just drag over the FTP template and fill out the requirements using the variables that ActiveBatch uses. And that makes it reusable. We can create a job once but use it for many different clients."
"The user interface is really incredible."
"For developers, it is easy to orchestrate the workflows and the integration has been very easy."
"The software offers real-time monitoring and reporting features that let IT teams keep tabs on the progress of their batch operations and workflows."
"Since we are no longer waiting for an operator to see that a job is finished, we have changed our daily cycle from running in eight hours down to about five. We had a third shift-operator retire and that position was never refilled."
"Easy to configure and simple to develop new features."
"ActiveBatch can automate predictable, repeatable processes very well. There is no real trick to what ActiveBatch does. ActiveBatch does exactly what you would expect a scheduling piece of software to do. It does it in a timely manner and does it with very little outside interference and fanfare. It runs when it is supposed to, and I don't have to jump through a bunch of hoops to double check it."
"It can connect to a number of third-party/legacy systems."
"The JSCAPE MFT Server offers support for diverse protocols such as FTP(S), SFTP, SCP, AFTP, OFTP, and TFPT."
"The user interface feels easy to use."
"It offers audit trails and reporting tools, allowing users to track file transfers, monitor user activities, and produce regulatory compliance reports."
"It keeps a clear record of all the file transfers that take place, the person who initiated them, and the outcome of the execution."
"The speed of transferring large datasets is super quick, which allows us to work on multiple tasks at a time."
"It is easy to transfer large sets of files."
"The user-friendly interface has made it easy for fresh users to adopt it."
"JSCAPE's automation can obliterate manual file transfer processes, salvaging precious time and vanquishing the chances of errors."
"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had it."
"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."
"Providing some detailed training materials could be very helpful for new users who have very limited technical information about the tool."
"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"The user interface can be improved so that it is more appealing and accessible to new users."
"They could provide an easier installation guide or technical support to the organizations during the installation process."
"There is this back and forth, where ActiveBatch says, "Your Oracle people should be dealing with this," and Oracle people say, "No, we don't know anything about ActiveBatch." Then, it all falls back on me as to what happens. Nobody is taking responsibility. This is the biggest failing for ActiveBatch."
"An area for improvement in ActiveBatch Workload Automation is its interface or GUI. It could be a little better. There isn't any additional feature I'd like to see in the tool, except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"The documentation part can be improved to be more precise for beginners to understand the advanced features of the tool."
"The initial setup and configuration are time-consuming."
"The user interface (UI) could be improved."
"The initial setup is time-consuming; it could use a video tutorial."
"The JSCAPE team could create detailed documents or blogs on how to troubleshoot certain errors that come over in integration with existing environment tools."
"Enhancing the user interface would make it more accessible and appealing to the new users and it will definitely enhance the user experience."
"The cost of the tool is relatively high and can pose a problem to medium and small-scale companies who are trying to overcome their on-premise server limitations."
"Database crashing was seen whenever there was an overload."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 5th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 35 reviews while JSCAPE by Redwood is ranked 8th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 21 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while JSCAPE by Redwood is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of JSCAPE by Redwood writes "Versatile, streamlines the entire file transfer procedure, and offers good support". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and Automic Workload Automation, whereas JSCAPE by Redwood is most compared with Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, MOVEit, Control-M and Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. JSCAPE by Redwood report.
See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.