Automic Workload Automation Review

Its script engine allows you to build everything you want

What is our primary use case?

We use the CA Automic solution for our complete business batch. We have several use cases, depending on the subcompany. We have an ABS system with a great batch and the lean system, therefore we have three different main batches with approximately 900,000 objects in the CA system. 

We have mostly connected our complete systems on the web front-end for the customer, so they can choose their products, manage their contracts, and get a new contract. This is all put into the automation system and handled there until, at the end, we have the output for printing, then we send it back to the customer.

What is most valuable?

We are on the user side of CA, not system engineers. We control the different batches, and this way is better for handling the systems than the way that we did it before. I like the script engine of CA, where you can build everything you want. If there are features not implemented, then you can script something around it, and it works.

What needs improvement?

  • The search is sometimes a little bit slow.
  • The calculation of the calendars needs improvement, as I have problems from time to time.
  • I am excited about the new web GUI from the B12. However, I am not sure about it, except for the main client that we had before needs improvement.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The system is very stable. I have very impressed with it. Also, it all depends on if it is Linux and Oracle or Windows and SQL. We have both in our company, and both are very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have a large batch with many objects in the CA system. Therefore, we are always at the upper end of the performance that the product can handle.

The search is sometimes very slow. I have heard in the B12 version that there is a new solution for this issue, but I don't know if it is usable because they duplicate the database and then you can search there, not the online database. We just moved to the B12 version, so we will see how it work. The rest of the performance is okay.

How are customer service and technical support?

From what I hear, it's good support. They always try to support us in the best way. 

Last year, when moving from B8 to B10, they have changed several features. One of our highly used features was no longer available. While it had a similar name, it was a completely different function. After calling the support and checking with them, they implemented the old feature for us again on the newer version.

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

About 15 years ago, we had CA-7 from CA. Then, we changed to the UC4 Automic. Now, we are back to CA.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Before we have our main releases, we always check between other products for the batch. In the last few years, it has always been Automic which was best for our needs.

I have seen all different types of scheduling systems. It is the best for my company to handle.

What other advice do I have?

It has an easy to handle GUI. Because of the script engine, you can do nearly everything you want. I prefer it to other solutions. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: It has to handle our batches, because we use many objects. It is good how we can migrate from the new tool and how much work is accepted for the migration. At the moment, we have not found anything better than the CA solution.

**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 Workload Automation reviews from users
...who work at a Financial Services Firm
...who compared it with IBM Workload Automation
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, BMC, IBM and others in Workload Automation. Updated: December 2020.
454,950 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment