AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs ActiveBatch by Redwood comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
ActiveBatch by Redwood Logo
1,659 views|534 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Amazon Web Services (AWS) Logo
views| comparisons
75% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Progress Software, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT).
To learn more, read our detailed Managed File Transfer (MFT) Report (Updated: March 2024).
767,847 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Using this tool, if there are any huge failures, we immediately get an email notification, and the proper team will be informed, at which time they can act accordingly.""Since I started using this product, I have been able to easily track everything as it mainly monitors, alerts, and looks after all the services - even across platform scheduling - which has helped me immensely.""ActiveBatch helped us automate and schedule routine tasks such as data backups, file transfers, database updates, and report generation, which frees IT staff to focus on other studies.""Approximately ~20 hours of manual effort have been reduced to ~5 hours with the help of ActiveBatch.""Since we are no longer waiting for an operator to see that a job is finished, we have changed our daily cycle from running in eight hours down to about five. We had a third shift-operator retire and that position was never refilled.""I found ActiveBatch Workload Automation to be a very good scheduling tool. What I like best about it is that it has very less downtime when managing many complex scheduling workflows, so I'm very impressed with ActiveBatch Workload Automation.""From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good.""The REST API adapters and native integrations for integrating and orchestrating the software stack are very flexible."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Pros →

"The solution offers good data recovery.""Being able to have the S3 files as storage is most valuable. We can use S3 as storage instead of an SFTP server or a machine.""The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Pros →

Cons
"Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referring to the documents.""Providing some detailed training materials could be very helpful for new users who have very limited technical information about the tool.""The product should be improved by providing a customization option.""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.""Any product is going to have some room for improvement, no matter what. I see the company has already ventured into AWS and they're constantly trying to improve the managed file transfer which they have recently improvised. I think they bought a software called JSCAPE and they're trying to improve it, which is good. I am not sure if JSCAPE would be part of the base product but currently, you have to buy a separate license for it, which doesn't make sense. If it was Microsoft, ServiceNow, or integrating with other software vendors, I would understand but JSCAPE is now in-house and I'm not sure if they can justify having a separate license for JSCAPE. I would probably expect them to be packaging JSCAPE into the base product. They did switch over from a perpetual license model to a subscription model, which hurt the company a little bit. Nobody is offering the perpetual model anymore. As long as the transition is fair for both the companies, I think it should be fine and not burn us out.""We have faced a couple of issues where we were supposed to log a defect with ActiveBatch. That said, the Active batch Vendor Support is very responsive and reliable.""They should offer pricing that is more affordable.""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."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Cons →

"The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled.""Could be more automated, particularly for file transfers.""Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Cons →

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."
  • "The pricing was fair. There are additional costs for the plugins. We have the standard licensing fees for different pieces, then we have the plugins which were add-ons. However, we expected that."
  • "I like ActiveBatch Workload Automation's licensing model because they're not holding you down on an agentless model or agent model, where every server needs to have an agent. That's the main selling point of the solution and I hope they stay that way."
  • "If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."
  • More ActiveBatch by Redwood Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It's $249 per month per instance. It's not great; it's pretty pricey. We've got multiple users on that one instance. If we had to build it by hand, we would win on cost there, but obviously, there is effort and time. In terms of the additional costs, they do have some specific pricing, but for our use case, we don't end up going over $249. They do specify in their pricing what they're charging for."
  • More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
    767,847 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Managing the workload and monitoring the tasks were very difficult with manual interventions. Now, by using ActiveBatch, the process is automated and it runs tasks on a scheduled basis.
    Top Answer:I'd advise users to start by knowing what the actual requirement is and thoroughly assess the automation needs. New users should take advantage of the demos and trial versions so they get an idea of… more »
    Top Answer:After upgrades we are facing a few issues and errors triggered, so focusing on this would be appreciated. Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referring… more »
    Top Answer:The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization.
    Top Answer:The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled.
    Top Answer:We have integrations with third-party systems that unfortunately make use of a very old-school, file-based protocol. Instead of an API or HTTP-based protocol where you make a request to an endpoint… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    1,659
    Comparisons
    534
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    658
    Rating
    9.3
    Unranked
    In Managed File Transfer (MFT)
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    ActiveBatch
    Learn More
    Overview

    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.

    Limitless Endpoints: Use native integrations and our low-code REST API adapter to connect to any server, any application, any service.

    Proactive Support Model: 24/7- US-based support and predictive diagnostics.

    Low Code Drag-and-Drop GUI: Easily build reliable, customizable, end-to-end processes.

    AWS Transfer for SFTP is a fully managed service that enables the transfer of files directly into and out of Amazon S3 using the Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP)—also known as Secure Shell (SSH) File Transfer Protocol.

    Sample Customers
    Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital
    Myriota, FINRA, Celgene, Kontor New Media, Belong, ThinkCX, BluTV
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company21%
    Computer Software Company21%
    Venture Capital & Private Equity Firm8%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm24%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Insurance Company8%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm27%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Insurance Company8%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    Managed File Transfer (MFT)
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Progress Software, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: March 2024.
    767,847 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 5th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 35 reviews while AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 3 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] writes "Always works, handles all types of load, and allows us to have S3 files as storage". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and IBM Workload Automation, whereas AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, MOVEit, Kiteworks, CA XCOM Data Transport and Aspera Managed File Transfer.

    See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.

    We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.