We performed a comparison between Control-M and Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer 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."We used Control-M's Python Client and cloud data service integrations with AWS and, as a feature, it was very customizable. It gave us a lot of flexibility for customizing whatever data maneuver we wanted to do within a pipeline."
"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."
"I find Control-M for SAP and Control-M for Informatica good. You can connect to the Linux or Windows servers, and you can run multiple jobs."
"Self Service for repeatable, low impact workload automation processes."
"In Helix Control-M, we have the automation API that allows us to customize and do integrations easily in any script, such as Java or Python. It is all integrated within the integration API."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for."
"Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important."
"We have a team called pro-mon and they monitor all the jobs for us. A single view for them makes it easy for them to monitor things."
"The Event Rules functionality is a key feature. It is very simple to understand and work with. If you have a support team that doesn't know anything about coding, they can really relate to the way event rules are designed. So, I try to make them as simplistic as possible when we create file transmissions. When I first started working in Globalscape, a lot of the file transmissions were handled through Advanced Workflow, which is a similar product. We had a lot of scripts in Advanced Workflow. I moved them to Event Viewer in Globalscape because of the simplicity of building scripts and understanding how they work. It literally takes 5 to 10 minutes to set one up, but if you're in an advanced workflow, it could take an hour to two hours to understand via code what it is actually doing. It has definitely been a plus."
"The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product."
"The Advanced Workflow Engine it comes with is brilliant because it allows us to create scripts and perform behind-the-scenes jobs that would otherwise require a third-party solution... You would have to create a special code on the outside to get all that other stuff done in the background. With Globalscape, we can get all of that done in one package."
"It bolsters security with features like Data Loss Prevention and seamless integration with DLP for a safe and compliant environment which enables real-time document sharing and control over file actions."
"A job skeleton can be used from test to production so you don't have to build jobs from scratch in production."
"Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us."
"It made things easier. Before, there were five to 10 different software solutions spread out over 10 different servers. Now, everything is being centralized into one location; facilitating, supporting, maintaining, training people, etc. There have been gains just because Globalscape EFT is more efficient at moving things around than our previous other applications. For instance, if I am connecting to someone over the Internet or transmitting for the client, the speed of transmitting those files through SFTP is 20% to 30% faster than our previous automated solution. Therefore, we have seen time savings."
"The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product."
"Control-M reporting isn't that good. It is very limited. We would like the ability to create our own reports as well as the ability to publish dashboards in the cloud, which would help us. Improved reporting will help us determine statuses and get the answers that we need. However, I personally think BMC is not focusing on the reporting. I have even visited the BMC office in India, and asked, "Why haven't you improved the reporting?""
"We've also had a few database bugs within our organization. I think we are migrating to OpenJDK rather than just regular Java and that has since shown some issues with our Control-M instance, timing out and causing our jobs to stop running. We are still working with BMC to fine-tune that and get that resolved."
"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."
"But for some issues, BMC will suggest to upgrade to new version which will not be feasible to standards of the organisation. Hence some work around should be shown to run the business until new version was upgraded."
"Finding documentation on the website can be a bit confusing."
"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."
"The report form and display function are weak; they are not very powerful."
"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"
"In the beginning, it could be considered a bit challenging."
"Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software."
"I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both."
"There are two ways to install Globalscape: as a standalone server or as a high-availability server, either Active-Active or Active-Standby. We are currently using standalone servers. That means if we want to upgrade the software, I shut down one of the two back-end servers, upgrade the software, make sure everything is correct, and then turn traffic back on to that one. I then proceed to upgrade the second server. With their high-availability solution, that is not a possibility. Both servers have to be shut down to perform the upgrade. We're a 24/7 shop. We don't have a window where we can have downtime."
"It could improve its operations by incorporating real-time collaboration features like those offered by platforms such as Microsoft OneDrive and Office 365."
"The folder monitoring services need improvement. Currently, with the folder monitoring services in Globalscape, if any changes are made to our firewalls, network, or something else that affects the directory services where the files are located, for some reason, the folder monitoring services get cut out, and the files are left there. They remain in the folder without being sent. I have over 50 file transmission processes that I would have to go to manually re-drop a file into the folder so that it processes the file transmission. There are times where even though I re-drop a file, it still doesn't work. In that case, I have to resynchronize the folder monitoring process, and it is a very big headache on my side that I have to deal with. It is not only related to Globalscape or their development team. It is on our side too. I just sent a support case where we found out yesterday that we had a file transmission that hasn't run in a whole year, and it was an important one. No one on the business side or the IT support side, as well as the vendor, had indicated that the file wasn't received or the data hadn't been updated. I found out that it was the folder monitoring service that was the problem when I initially had the problem last October, and this was the file that I just missed. So, I re-dropped the file in yesterday, and the monitor worked. It runs every week, so we sent a file to that folder, and it processed that out."
"We need some capability for faster transfers and large file transfers. If we want to transfer a terabyte file, it is not capable of doing that right now. They say it is possible, but we are not able to do so with our environment."
"Another area for improvement is the ARM (Auditing and Reporting Module) database, in terms of accuracy and the data being logged."
More Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Control-M is ranked 2nd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 110 reviews while Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is ranked 12th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 10 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is rated 8.4. 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 Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer writes "Rock solid, secure, and excellent price and quality of service". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, WS_FTP Server, JSCAPE by Redwood, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT. See our Control-M vs. Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer 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.