Stonebranch Universal Automation Center Review

We had no enterprise solution in place for our application. This was meant to support Linux and Windows.

The organization supports an application which impacts multiple platforms. This has helped a great deal with the initial setup and ongoing maintenance, in terms of being able to do so in one place.

• The layout of the UI is solid.  
• It has really helped scale automation efforts.
• I also like the existing templates.
  

• FTP tasks have been an issue. 
• It has also been challenging to support PGP encryption which is a fairly standard encryption method.
  

No issues with the stability of UAC, it has really never been a problem for us.

The tool is consistently executing large batch jobs. Issues that we attempt to correct are more often than not within the application itself and not UAC.

Not much interaction personally.

At other organizations, I have used CA Unicenter. It was OK, but on working with UAC, I prefer this tool.

There were some complexities, but that was our own doing in terms of our application and the platforms we support.

We used Stonebranch, they were solid.

We have far fewer folks running jobs manually from a command prompt. We have visibility into our job streams. ROI continues to grow.

Found it to be reasonable and worth the investment.

Yes, CA Unicenter was considered.