We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation, and Stonebranch based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."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."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The interface is good."
"It is really a robust product."
"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."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"An important feature is the ability to modify PeopleSoft Run Controls at run-time."
"You gain a lot of time and effort because you can automatize many things. Repetitive tasks costs us, so we can reduce them to zero effort and minimal costs by using the product."
"It's allowing us to increase our overall volumes of data that we're working with, without actually increasing the overall amount of team that we need to monitor it."
"The functionality is great, the scripting language is very powerful. They can adapt to most use cases. Very good community of different companies and a user base so when we have problems we can go to other people."
"We have everything in one system."
"It helps our efficiency because it is a batch processing tool which works without a menu."
"We have all of our payroll being done in the platform. There are a lot of different processes that need to be taken care of, and they all need to be linked together. When you put them into a workflow, and you know that you've built logic into that workflow, and you have alerting, it's something you can step back from. You don't have to be worried about every single piece of that puzzle. If something goes wrong, you have confidence that some alerting will let you know. It streamlines, it makes things go faster, less eyes on glass."
"The ability to be able to automate more of our business processes."
"I like the dashboard and the various workflows."
"When it comes to agent technology and compatibility with other vendors, from a platform perspective it was the one vendor that fit all the platforms that we have, from your old platforms - mainframe, NSK, IBM i - to the new ones, going into cloud and container"
"The support is good from Stonebranch Universal Automation Center."
"The ability to monitor tasks that are on the open-system side as well as our mainframe side gives us a one-window view of all our processes."
"I can name the aliases on the agent, so if we need a passive environment for an agent, that's one of the nice features. If our primary goes down, I can bring up the passive one and I don't have to change anything in the scheduling world. It will start running from that new server."
"I love the Universal Controller. It's been great for us. We host it on-premise... It's High Availability, meaning there's failover from one server to the other if one goes down."
"We like that it has GUI and is not just a command line."
"Stonebranch performs well, and the graphical representation is excellent. Overall, it requires more technical effort from our teams, but the solution is intuitive, so anybody can use it."
"It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD)."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"The scalability could improve."
"We are looking for additional features that would allow us to call APIs and integrate the product with other tools more effectively."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"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."
"There are certain jobs that are triggered one after another. It would be helpful to have a more user-friendly way of seeing how these jobs are connecting from one server to another."
"Content of file transfers cannot be searched by the system, but has to be done by the user interface. This is not good, as it has been erased often."
"I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution."
"The user interface could be a little more user-friendly, as it is not the best out there."
"Most of our issues are related to the system, not the job scheduling, such as, bugs and unexpected downtime of the application or database."
"There are some problems when using the new interface."
"I would like to see the event engine in the next release."
"Some of the usual features, like calendar details, are now not there."
"I would rate Stonebranch somewhere in the middle for ease of setup. It wasn't too straightforward for us because our infrastructure is complex."
"There is a component called the OMS, which is the message broker. We rely on infrastructure, resiliency, and availability for that piece. If that could change to be highly available just as a software component, so that we don't have to provide the high-available storage, etc. for it, that would be a plus. It would just be cheaper to run."
"One hiccup we've had is due to the fact that we have other internal scheduling tools. We're able to talk to them, but we have trouble with some of the networking between them, so we're still trying to work out the kinks there."
"It's not available on the cloud, so they should take that due to safety, security, and scalability."
"It would be ideal if they had the exact same features as the CA Workload Automation DE series. It would be helpful to have calendaring options."
"Stonebranch Universal Automation Center could improve the analytics."
"It can't handle negative written codes."
"It can be hard to manage the task monitor."
