Stonebranch Universal Automation Center Review

We use it for scheduling Unix and Wintel batches.

What is our primary use case?

Scheduling Unix and Wintel batches. Full package - finance, backups, transfers. Three environments.  

How has it helped my organization?

Our organization could enter the cloud at full speed. 

What is most valuable?

Triggers separate from tasks contrary to the competitors.  

What needs improvement?

Lifecycle management.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

solution in general stable however last OMS updates are blurring out this opinion.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

scalability is good however it is lacking alternative to extend controller cluster's node numer.

How are customer service and technical support?

reaction time is fair, however it happens that their will of help it not necessary handy, especially when you hardening the solution.

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

previous scheduler was TWS 8.5.  More expensive, less stable, less capable

How was the initial setup?

a basic setup is straight forward however during setting some more advansed option it could be complex to achive

What about the implementation team?

in-house

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

for sure unlimited license

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

control m

Which version of this solution are you currently using?

6.4.4
**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More Stonebranch Universal Automation Center reviews from users
...who work at a Financial Services Firm
...at Large Enterprises
Free Report: Stonebranch Universal Automation Center Reviews and More
Learn what your peers think about Stonebranch Universal Automation Center. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: December 2020.
Download now
455,536 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment
Guest
1 Comment
author avatarRadomir P.
Top 10Real User

lack of status driven agent monitoring

Reply Like (0)
Author
Highlights
We lean a lot on the multi-tenancy that they offer within the product, the ability to get other people to self-manage their estate, versus having a central team do all the scheduling.
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
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 have found the agents to be so much simpler, when compared to ESP.
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 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.
The most valuable feature is the reliability of the agents, because we need them accessible and we need to run stuff. The agent technology and compatibility are top-notch.
See more »
Product Categories
Workload Automation
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Stonebranch Universal Automation Center Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Download Now
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions: