Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Review

The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it, but everybody has to need to use this tool in the organization

What is our primary use case?

We use a single application and are trying to deploy it with Automic Release Automation (ARA). It works for one component, so we decided to spread the tool to all our applications and make it the status quo. Today, we are still trying to deploy more applications with this tool.

How has it helped my organization?

The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it, but everybody has to need to use this tool in the organization. If some organizations have their own tool, it is hard to make it clear that ARA would be better if everyone used it, because it provides a benefit when you can monitor all the users.

What is most valuable?

The parameters in this tool are valuable, but there are also some mistakes with the management of its parameters. This tool needs more user management for its parameter. What it has is not enough. 

What needs improvement?

  • I need a better way to manage users. I need user groups and dynamic properties in Release Automation. 
  • I want to access separate users in different folders. That would be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

Still implementing.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

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. This is a big issues with the tool because the agent has to run. If it does not run, then the process has to stop, so the monitoring tool can see that the process is not running, and that does not always work.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It depends on the contract that you have with Automic. If you have a fixed contract, it has limits to spreading out. If you have a flexible enterprise license contract, then you have a lot of scalability for this tool. Then, you can use everything. So, it will depend on the contract that you will make with Automic.

How are customer service and technical support?

For Automic, we use the typical support, not any specific technical support. We make a ticket, state what we want, label it: Automic, and they answer.

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. They ask the development and the answer doesn't help. They say "We can see the problem, but the customer will have to do a workaround." That is a typical answer.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

In the past, we used a mainframe system BS2000 and UC4. We used this before and was able to use BS2000 with 2000 agents, which was very important for us. We decided to use UC4 before so we are in contact with Atomic the whole time.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the initial setup.

What was our ROI?

Nowadays, it costs more than before, because of the conception work you have to do and not every team uses it. So, we have more costs.

In the future, when everybody uses it, then we can lower our costs because of agile, and it will be more efficient than before.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend not using ARA, but Automatic Workload Automation (AWA) because it is a more flexible tool. You can deploy and do release stuff on it.

**Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation reviews from users
...who work at a Financial Services Firm
...who compared it with Ansible
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Red Hat, IBM and others in Release Automation. Updated: May 2021.
509,820 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment