We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Control-M based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."We have saved on our time costs and have seen more quality."
"The IT process automation is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"The product provides efficiency, in terms time, cost, and resources."
"The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it."
"It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use."
"The capability to provide visibility to the stakeholders, to management, is the biggest piece that showcases what the solution is about."
"I would say our headwind, or our time to market, is reduced considerably. We get more consistent results out of it, because you write one time and once it's automated you expect it to behave the same way every time. And it cut down a lot of re-work for us."
"The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice."
"Our ability to integrate with many different solutions has been invaluable. The new approach of the automation API and jobs-as-code is also valuable."
"You can let users access the system and manage jobs: self-service."
"We have a better picture of our auditability. When someone comes to us, and asks for sources, "How did the deltas occur?" We can provide answers quickly, or at least quicker than what we used to. We are actually sure of the information that we provide, where before it was like, "Hmm, I think it comes from over there. Let me double check, but it gets really convoluted over here and I think that is where it comes from." Now, if it is within the Control-M environment, it has a straightforward answer that we can provide with confidence."
"The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."
"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."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"The dashboard should allow you to see the current state of packages in each environment, not only on an individual application basis, but across the entire application platform."
"If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details."
"There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system."
"key thing is support for cloud-based deployment. That is lacking."
"It would be very beneficial for us to see integrations into cloud environments, especially into the Google Cloud environment because we are heading towards cloud."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together."
"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."
"The infrastructure updates could use improvement. Some of the previous updates that we have run to get to version nineteen were troublesome. So, a more seamless upgrade path for the infrastructure components would be useful. I don't know if they have replaced that in version 20 or if version 20 has an easier path, but I would like to see the upgrade from one version to the next version be a little smoother."
"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."
"In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations."
"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."
"With earlier versions, the support was not accurate or delivered in a timely manner. What would happen is that I would be in production mode and I would have an issue and would want to get someone on a call to see what was happening. But they would always say, “Hey, provide the log first and then we'll review and we'll get back to you." I feel that when a customer asks about a production issue, they should jump onto the call to see what is going on, and then collect the logs."
"We would recommend modernizing the look and feel of Control-M. They also need to move towards more self-service and development in their environment. It's very antiquated."
"The response time could be faster when you need a person to answer your questions. There are situations where availability becomes crucial."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Control-M is ranked 3rd in Process Automation with 110 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with , whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence.
We monitor all Release 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.
