Automic Workload Automation Other Solutions Considered

Vinit Choudahry
Technical Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
What makes it stand out from the competitors I have seen is it has distributed architecture. If you look at BMC Control-M vs Automic Workload Automation, the brain is the central, enterprise management server. That's where all the jobs reside. Every day, a new set of jobs loads onto the agent, and then the agent executes. If the central server is down, there will be no jobs executing across the environment. However, when it comes to CA Automic, it has a distributed architecture which means all the logic, all the jobs, reside on the agent itself. Irrespective of whether the management server is running or not, your jobs will execute in a timely way. The only challenge could be that you will not be able to see their outcome. You will not be able to monitor them. That could be a challenge. But again, at least the jobs are executing in a timely fashion, as they're supposed to, in your environment. View full review »
Sr Production Control Analyst at a logistics company with 10,001+ employees
That would have been 20 years ago, so the market is a little different than it was back then. There are solutions today that did not exist back then. Pretty much all of the big players still exist today. But we're definitely in a different place today than we were back then. View full review »
Irvin Carney
DevOps Engineer at 84.51
I got brought in when they signed the contract. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Technologies, BMC, IBM and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2019.
365,820 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ruairi Brennan
IT Manager at ESB
We have not found another product that can do what Automic can do. View full review »
Christine Bauder
Assistant Director of Production Services
I believe we looked at BMC and other CA products but chose Automic because of its ability to easily integrate with other applications and services, and because of how user-friendly it is. View full review »
Marcel Specht
IT Automation Specialist at Dm- Drogerie Markt
From the bad products, the Automic is the best. All products in the market are not good since they are simple workload scheduling. There are some things are missing in the Automic product, which our management does not see. View full review »
Technical Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
No. We just decided to stay with what we had because we have had really good luck with it and we are very satisfied with the product. View full review »
Jared Kessans
Lead Systems Administrator at Great American Insurance
I am unsure as it was before I started administering the application. View full review »
Axel Lambrecht
Systems Engineer at Merck KGaA
I know that it was evaluated against other tools in 2000, but I do not know which ones. View full review »
VInce Sola
Manager, Application Administration at a leisure / travel company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at BMC, Tidal Software, ORSYP, and ActiveBatch. View full review »
Hubert Rossle
System Specialist at a tech services company
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. View full review »
Automic Job Developer at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
If the company is big, use Automic because you are able to automate things more easily. If the company is smaller, use Control-M. The understanding of it is easier than Automic, because it offers more. So, if you are smaller and don't need such overload, use something else, like Control-M. View full review »
Aicke Sandrock
Engineering Job Scheduling at IT S Care
No competitor has this mass possibilities to design processors for automation solutions. View full review »
Automation Engineer at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Possibly IBM, because we are a big IBM customer. View full review »
Our customers also evaluated Redwood Software. However, they do not have the same flexibility as CA. View full review »
Martin Mertens
Manager of Global Process Automation at Adidas Group
On the shortlist, when we purchased the product, we had CA, Stonebranch, BMC Control-M, Automic, and our current vendor in mind. A few of them were kicked out during the first session because they were not able to deliver everything. In the end, we had BMC and Automic. View full review »
Eric Gauthier
Senior System Engineer at BECU
Really take a look at Automic. They are a great company to work with and they have the best automation package out there. We did look at a lot of different packages when we were out there. I was not part of the initial decision process, but I did see the use cases that they did, the companies that they looked at, because they made the decision shortly after I came. They looked at BMC and Tivoli. It was quite a while ago, but they were able to come and do a proof of concept very quickly with our use cases and really show value quickly. View full review »
Unix Administrator at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We looked at this solution and we also look at another company. The reason we went with this solution is because we had been working with them for a long time and we trusted their products. For us, our learning curve would not be as steep. View full review »
Systems Analyst at a tech services company
We evaluate vendors every year to see if it is possible to change. We look everywhere. We have had Atomic since 2005. It was the only software with scheduling on the mainframe for clients. View full review »
Matthias Wanke
Automation Engineer at Ing-Diba Ag
We evaluated some competitors a decade ago, and Automic (UC4) was the best choice. We look at the product and features. We did tests and an installation of the product, then we decided on Automic. The other competitors, 10 years ago, were CA and IBM. View full review »
Enzo Fusco
Systems Engineer at Consoft Systemi
CA was the only vendor on our shortlist. We are a partner of CA technology. They let us know that they wanted us to invest in this product, particularly in Italy, because they work in Italy. That is why I started to learn this product. View full review »
Senior Programmer at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
There were a couple other vendors. View full review »
Bartlomiej Stawecki
Consultant at Project Management.Pl
Our customers also evaluated Tivoli and BMC. View full review »
Ryan Bryers
UK CTO with 5,001-10,000 employees
It ticked all the boxes. We were looking at WLMD, Automic, or CCM to have more future proof capability than what we would like. You have got the functionality and everything like that. What we would like seemed to be a strategic product, whereas maybe in the past it was a lot of by-products, use it and throw it away. So that appealed to us. We actually got to physically use the product before saying, "Yes." We also looked at BMC PATROL, and I think two things impressed me versus BMC: * The tool fit and the migration were a lot more automated. * CA company engagement. View full review »
Hartwig Esch
Administrator at VW Financial Services
We did not evaluate anyone else for job scheduling. View full review »
Hesham ElSheikha
Workload Automation Expert at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automic is gaining much more ground than other products. The other one is the BMC, but it is not as good. View full review »
Systems Administrator at Athene Deutschland Service Gmbh
I do not remember. View full review »
Norbert Bollinger
Production Services at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
We did not evaluate anyone else. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Technologies, BMC, IBM and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2019.
365,820 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sign Up with Email