We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AppWorx Workload Automation is highly praised for its easy-to-use interface and dependable performance. Users appreciate its simplicity and efficiency in managing nightly tasks and performing calculations. Automic Workload Automation is known for its impressive strength, scalability, and seamless integration. It offers seamless control over various operating systems and products, along with pre-defined templates and convenient web browser access.
The users recommend that AppWorx Workload Automation should focus on improving API integration, integration with other tools, and scalability. Automic Workload Automation needs enhancements in automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition, file transfer, pricing, and support.
Service and Support: AppWorx Workload Automation has been praised for its customer service and highly rated technical support. Automic Workload Automation has received mixed feedback, with some customers praising the support while others have faced challenges in reaching the team.
Ease of Deployment: AppWorx Workload Automation's initial setup is considered relatively easy. However, it can be a time-consuming process. Administrator access and involvement are necessary for the setup. Automic Workload Automation's setup time and complexity can vary. It can be completed within one to five days, depending on the specific requirements.
Pricing: AppWorx Workload Automation has a costly setup determined by the number of orchestrated systems used. Automic Workload Automation has made pricing and licensing changes, making it more affordable. It is considered one of the most expensive options on the market, as the cost depends on the number of systems being orchestrated.
ROI: There are no specific details about the ROI for AppWorx Workload Automation. Users mentioned Automic Workload Automation was not renewed due to cost-cutting measures, indicating it was seen as an extra cost.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred choice over AppWorx Workload Automation. Users appreciate its robustness, scalability, and ease of implementation. They also commend its extensive features and user-friendly interface. Automic Workload Automation offers a versatile single solution that can handle different use cases without requiring additional tools.
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"It is an object-based approach to task and process design in conjunction with conditional logic and event-based scheduling actions, which enables a build once/use often design methodology to be employed."
"It has improved my organization through automation of back office and infrastructure procedures, and by integrating and orchestrating key business applications spanning multiple technology stacks."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"The interface is good."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"It is really a robust product."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"It enables us to build automation which is flexible in a controlled environment."
"We have seen improvements in time efficiency and cost resources, because we are mainly focused on the SAP area, and its automation in that part."
"The most valuable feature is the one for SAP batch processing... There are certain other mid-level workload automation tools which can handle the OS level, but SAP is something which is really very critical. Automic stands out from the ordinary tools because handling SAP processes is absolutely easy with it."
"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."
"Integration with most of the platforms that we have within the company's Windows, Linux, and Unix. Integrating these inside the automation agent for scheduling, backups, file transfer, and SAP jobs."
"We have a lot of governance and compliance requirements as a bank that we can fulfill with this product."
"We have seen a cost improvement from it."
"We automate very manual, robust tasks, which are very time consuming and not error-free."
"The scalability could improve."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"It is not really scaling per say because they are not putting much into it. They are trying to push their new product."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"It has been a deprecated product, because it is so old. There has been a couple of new solutions that are a little more advanced."
"We are looking for additional features that would allow us to call APIs and integrate the product with other tools more effectively."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"When you want to use the entirety of Automic, it is heavy."
"If you're getting deep into some of these workflows, you may have 20 different windows open and, if you didn't already have that deep understanding of how enterprise orchestration works, it would be very overwhelming to get up to speed on something like that... It needs some way to minimize the amount of windows and get it to where you could have all the information you need available on the screen."
"In terms of what can be improved, we are in Israel, so we work in Hebrew. Now they are starting to move it also from English to Hebrew and to support the language, but for us it has been very difficult because the Hebrew looks like gibberish. So there are language issues."
"With every new version, things that would previously work, Automic breaks them. So, we have to report the new bugs. Therefore, every time when we patch the system, there is usually a new bug or a feature that was working, then it stops working."
"Our area with the CA solution for DR is not really concerning directly to Automic, but to all of the DevOps, a word which is something that everybody is trying to touch on today in their daily business. There is also some gap that's a little bit hard to understand or to implement because not all the organizations are the same. When you are adopting DevOps, you may need to be more flexible in your processes."
"The scalability is limited by the SQL in the background, and that is a problem."
"I should be able to grant a user access to execute a job without having to directly list every include, prompt set, output scan, script, login, etc. An inherited read for execution purposes would accomplish the same results without making the admin list every single object every time, as well as deny the user the ability to edit."
"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". On the other hand, 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 ". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence, Stonebranch and OpCon, whereas Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. Automic Workload Automation 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.