I evaluated Tidal.

I did not evaluate other vendors. I didn't work on the Control-M kind of thing, so I cannot compare this with the other similar software. I only have experience with AutoSys over the last year. 

We did not evaluate other solutions. It was the client's position to use this product as they were offered a good deal. At that time, we were using control M and I was initially hesitant due to the challenges I saw in terms of how the product handles the jobs. The client already decided on the solution and we just had to learn to love it. 

We have been using it for a long time, but now we are looking at some of the cloud solutions. We are moving a lot of processes to the cloud, and the features for the cloud are being investigated.

BMC Control-M, IBM TWS.

For the most part it compares similarly to IBM and they each have their pluses and minuses. They both scale out and they're both found in very large environments.

Before choosing this product, we also evaluated BMC Control-M.

The management went out and looked at different tools and brought them in, and we looked at different things because we were wanting to run across multiple platforms. TWS couldn't do that. It was mainly a mainframe and when we were really branching out to the different distributed platforms, we needed a tool that would cover all of them and ESP was that.

We were in a situation where we had one of everything and we really went out to do a consolidation in the solutions that we were using. We really saw the CA solution as something that would give us the reliability and the scalability to move us forward in the future. We really didn't see that from a lot of the other solutions in the industry, so we chose them.

When we are selecting a vendor, the support is really the first and foremost criteria, and then I guess support going forward, so, the development organization: How are they addressing changes in the industry, changes in the solution? That sort of thing.

A couple of our customers use Control M, so we considered that as well, from what I understand.

The actual decision to install AutoSys was out of my hands, but it was recommended. It is one of the better products on the market.

At that time CA owned three schedulers and CA-7 was the one we were using. The other two did not necessarily apply to our environment. And there weren't too many others out there. I think we might still have taken a cheap route. We might not of actively compared with other products that were on the market at the time, other than comparing it to CA, and we thought we were getting a good deal.

I think there was a list of different types of companies. I can't remember the names because, like I said, it's been a while.

We did not evaluate other options.

There were three other vendors involved, which didn't meet our full needs because we're cross-platform. We have Windows, IBM iSeries, Oracle, SQL, all that. And this product tends to fit in more with all of our products, based on just one platform alone.

We compared CA Workload Automation with IBM, as well as BMC. We went with CA because we really like the interface, and the way it worked with our products that we already had in house. We did have a bunch of other CA products, and it seemed to tie in pretty well with those.

MainView is a BMC product for monitoring. OMEGAMON is monitoring from IBM. Each one of them cover a different set of products.

At that time I wasn't high enough up. By the time it rolled out I was happy with how I was able to get up to speed in the product, and support what I needed to support. But I was not involved in evaluating other products.

When we look for new products, the user functionality and ease of use are important, as is making sure it's stable. The knowledge transfer is easy.

Before choosing this product, we also evaluated BMC Control-M.

My advice would be to compare CA to BMC. We did, and found CA to be the better product.

We were looking at IBM. Because our industry was growing as far as using servers, CA was a better fit.

When comparing this tool to others it is far better.

Yes.  IBM TWS/OPC, BMC Control-M and ASG-Zeke.

LRS, Rocket Software, and CA. We chose CA because of the support of the products and the relationship.

We evaluated other options, including Maestro, CA7, and Control M, to name a few.

We evaluated other products, but it was several years ago.

We evaluated between different scheduling systems. We finally decided on the Automic solution.

Yes, IBM’s solution.

We evaluated JAMS.

After conducting extensive market evaluation, we chose the CA Autosys tool.