Most Helpful Review
Native API calls are very good and very easy, enabling us to tie in to a large range of solutions, including Tableau...
Use Aspera Managed File Transfer? Share your opinion.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"One of the most valuable features is the job templates. If we need to create an FTP job, we just drag over the FTP template and fill out the requirements using the variables that ActiveBatch uses. And that makes it reusable. We can create a job once but use it for many different clients."
"The nice thing about ActiveBatch is once we have created a specific job that can be easily be replicated to another job, then minimal changes will have to be made. This makes things nice. Reduction of coding is substantial in a lot of cases. The replication of one job to another is just doing a few minor tweaks and rolling it into production. This decreases our development costs substantially."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to trigger workflows, one after another, based on success, without having to worry about overlapping workflows. The ability to integrate our BI, analytics, and our data quality jobs is also valuable"
"What ActiveBatch allows you to do is develop a more efficient process. It gave me visibility into all my jobs so I could choose which jobs to run in parallel. This is much easier than when I have to try to do it through cron for Windows XP, where you really can't do things in parallel and know what is going on."
"We use the main job-scheduling feature. It's the only thing we use in the tool. That's the reason we are using the tool: to reduce costs by replacing manual tasks with automated tasks and to perform regular, repetitive tasks in a more reliable way."
"As far as centralization goes it's nice because we can see all these processes that are tied to this larger process. The commissions, FTP processing, the reporting, the file moves to the business users — all that is right there. It's very easy to read. It's easy to tie it together, visually, and see where each of these steps fits into the bigger picture."
"The Jobs Library has been a tremendous asset. For the most, that's what we use. There are some outliers, but we pretty much integrate those Jobs Library steps throughout the process, whether it's REST calls, FTP processes, or file copies and moves... That has helped us to build end-to-end workflows."
"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."
"Good user interface and ability to set up multiple file transfer jobs."
"It does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex. You have to learn how it does things. I don't know if it's any worse than any other tool would be, just because of the nature of what it does... the learning curve is the hardest part."
"There is this back and forth, where ActiveBatch says, "Your Oracle people should be dealing with this," and Oracle people say, "No, we don't know anything about ActiveBatch." Then, it all falls back on me as to what happens. Nobody is taking responsibility. This is the biggest failing for ActiveBatch."
"The thing I've noticed the most is the Help function. It's very difficult, at times, to find examples of how to do something. The Help function will explain what the tool does, but we're not a Windows shop at the data warehouse. Our data warehouse jobs actually run on Linux servers. Finding things for Linux-based solutions is not as easy as it is for Windows-based solutions. I would like to see more examples, and more non-Windows examples as well, in the Help."
"I can't get the cleaning up of logs to work consistently. Right now, we are not setup correctly, and maybe it is something that I have not effectively communicated to them."
"It could be easier to provide dashboards on how many jobs are running at the same time; more monitoring."
"One thing I've noticed is that navigation can be difficult unless you are familiar with the structure that we have in place. If someone else had to look at our ActiveBatch console and find a job, they might not know where to find it."
"The interface is not that user-friendly and is a little tough to navigate."
"There are some issues with this version and finding the jobs that it ran. If you're looking at 1,000 different jobs, it shows based on the execution time, not necessarily the run time. So, if there was a constraint waiting, you may be looking for it in the wrong time frame. Plus, with thousands of jobs showing up and the way it pages output jobs, sometimes you end up with multiple pages on the screen, then you have to go through to find the specific job you're looking for. On the opposite side, you can limit the daily activity screen to show only jobs that failed or jobs currently running, which will shrink that back down. However, we have operators who are looking at the whole nightly cycle to make sure everything is there and make sure nothing got blocked or was waiting. Sometimes, they have a hard time finding every item within the list."
"Deployment is complex and it was difficult to get support."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."
"I don't think we've ever had a problem with the pricing or licensing. Even the maintenance fees are very much in line. They are not excessive. I think for the support that you get, you get a good value for your money. It's the best value on the market."
"It allows for lower operational overhead."
"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."
"ActiveBatch is currently redesigning themselves. In the past, they were a low cost solution for automation. They had a nice tool that was very inexpensive. With their five-year plan, they will be more enhancement-driven, so they're trying to improve their software, customer service, and the way that their customers get information from them. In doing that, they're raising the price of their base system. They changed from one pricing model to another, which has caused some friction between ActiveBatch and us. We're working through that right now with them. That's one of the reasons why we're why we were evaluating other software packages."
"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."
Information Not Available
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: We use the main job-scheduling feature. It's the only thing we use in the tool. That's the reason we are using the tool: to reduce costs by replacing manual tasks with automated tasks and to perform… more »
Top Answer: The cost is outside the scope of my job responsibilities. Obviously we're using it, so it was worth the cost. I think it's a tremendous product. I don't know what the cost is compared to others, but… more »
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
out of 42 in Managed File Transfer
Average Words per Review
out of 42 in Managed File Transfer
Average Words per Review
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Also Known As
|Advanced Systems Concepts||IBM|
Orchestrate your entire tech stack with ActiveBatch Workload Automation and Enterprise Job Scheduling. Build and centralize end-to-end workflows under a single pane of glass. Seamlessly manage systems, applications, and services across your organization. Eliminate manual workflows with ActiveBatch so you can focus on higher value activities that drive your company forward.
|The Aspera transfer platform is the the most advanced software solution for file transfer, synchronization and streaming of digital assets, allowing users and enterprises secure high speed movement of all of their data over any distance, to any environment, with none of the waiting. Covering a wide range of server, desktop and mobile operating systems, Aspera provides the most modern and flexible options as Software as a Service (SaaS), Run-your-own Software in the Cloud (single tenant), and On Premise Deployments.|
Learn more about ActiveBatch Workload Automation
Learn more about Aspera Managed File Transfer
|Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital||Gwinnett County Public Schools, Evonik, Voith, BITMARCK, Oracle|
Leisure / Travel Company11%
Renewables & Environment Company11%
Computer Software Company43%
Financial Services Firm6%
Computer Software Company40%
No Data Available
ActiveBatch Workload Automation is ranked 2nd in Managed File Transfer with 9 reviews while Aspera Managed File Transfer is ranked 10th in Managed File Transfer with 1 review. ActiveBatch Workload Automation is rated 9.2, while Aspera Managed File Transfer is rated 5.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch Workload Automation writes "Everything runs automatically from start to finish; we don't have to worry about somebody clicking the wrong button". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Aspera Managed File Transfer writes "Good user interface but implementation was a complex process". ActiveBatch Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, Automic Workload Automation, AutoSys Workload Automation, Stonebranch Universal Automation Center and Tidal Automation, whereas Aspera Managed File Transfer is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, Accellion, HelpSystems GoAnywhere MFT and MOVEit.
See our list of best Managed File Transfer vendors.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.