We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch Workload Automation and OpCon based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: ActiveBatch Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ability to adapt to different needs, offering prebuilt jobs and a user-friendly configuration. Its real-time monitoring and scalability are also notable features, as is its compatibility with various platforms. OpCon is commended for its flexibility and self-service capabilities, particularly in automating manual tasks. It also boasts a visually appealing graphical interface and the ability to seamlessly integrate with other systems.
ActiveBatch could enhance its managed file transfer, user interface, reliability of triggers, monitoring dashboard, documentation, support service, software setup process, email alerts, lag and stability issues, customization options, pricing, and customer support. OpCon could improve its web-based interface, upgrading process, documentation, logs, self-service functionality, cost, self-service capabilities, custom job subtypes, integration with FICS, and mainframe support.
Service and Support: ActiveBatch Workload Automation receives praise for its customer service, particularly for its helpful and reliable technical support. However, some users have expressed concerns about the service model and availability of the hotline. OpCon also receives positive feedback for its customer service, with a great support team that prioritizes urgent issues and offers timely and effective solutions.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for ActiveBatch Workload Automation is straightforward and uncomplicated, although there is a small requirement for additional instructions when importing files and configuring it on various systems. OpCon's initial setup can be intricate, but with support from SMA consultants, it becomes more seamless and manageable.
Pricing: The setup process for ActiveBatch Workload Automation is straightforward and quick, with users finding the pricing to be fair and competitive. OpCon is recognized as a costly and intricate solution that demands time for understanding, however, it offers good value for the investment.
ROI: ActiveBatch Workload Automation has been commended for its positive financial impact, leading to a notable rise in net revenue. Users find it valuable, even though they have limited understanding of ROI monitoring. OpCon is praised for its time-saving capabilities, error reduction, and elimination of the requirement for full-time operators.
Comparison Results: ActiveBatch Workload Automation is the favored choice compared to OpCon. Users appreciate ActiveBatch's simplicity and user-friendly setup. ActiveBatch is also commended for its versatility and easy configuration, providing prebuilt jobs and an intuitive interface.
"It has helped with scheduling complex jobs with simple scripts."
"Error Handling is one of the best standout features of ActiveBatch."
"The software offers real-time monitoring and reporting features that let IT teams keep tabs on the progress of their batch operations and workflows."
"By implementing a sophisticated scheduling mechanism, the system allows for the precise triggering of jobs at user-selected frequencies, enabling a seamless and automated execution of tasks according to specified time intervals."
"For developers, it is easy to orchestrate the workflows and the integration has been very easy."
"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."
"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 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."
"It allows batch work to run as smoothly and efficiently as possible."
"The core system is the most valuable part: being able to view the processes that we've never really been able to view as a whole before. That is super-helpful, as is being alerted when issues arise."
"I find OpCon's ability to monitor files and folders, and its integration with other software to be the most valuable."
"We particularly like the fact that it's graphical because it is Windows-based. Before, we were text-based on the mainframe. You can also produce flow charts. Because it's point-and-click, its ease of use is very nice."
"File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder."
"Manual processing has been automated 99 percent by OpCon. With new processes, we give it at least two weeks manual so we can write down the details of how to do the steps, then we automate it. Within a month, it has been automated, then it's no longer a manual process."
"The biggest example in which OpCon has improved my organization is that we have to download and process files from the federal reserve several times a day. If we don't do it in a certain timeframe, we can be penalized. It's the fact that we can download these files, process them, get our accounting teams the information they need to work the exceptions that is one of the most important roles."
"The whole product is valuable to us because of the integrations that it has with the MCP and the Windows environments. You have to have the agent on each one of them that you want to monitor. The integrations that we have created are along the lines of extracting files and sending them through SFTP to another vendor. Those are the things that were taking a lot of time away from my staff."
"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 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."
"Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referring to the documents."
"There are very few documents that provide us with detailed information on the troubleshooting of errors that occur during integration with the existing environment."
"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."
"Providing some detailed training materials could be very helpful for new users who have very limited technical information about the tool."
"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had it."
"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 sometimes have a large number of jobs on the SQL Server and we can experience a very light lag in job starts. The lag can be a few seconds. It's never more than one minute, but sometimes we can experience some lags."
"The learning curve could be shorter. The problem is that it's difficult to simplify a product without taking away functionality. I would love to see OpCon become a little easier to grasp. However, my concern is that making things easier isn't always better for the product. If they can keep the integrity of the product while making it easier to learn, that would be an area of improvement."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"A way to select multiple jobs in the UI for a quick change or to hold, release, et cetera, would be nice."
"There is a learning curve. We had to go to class, learn, and take their training classes, then come back. We got assistance from OpCon as well to convert our processes on the Unisys machine over to the IBM. Now, when we add new products, it's pretty straightforward to write a new process and schedule it, then run it at a set time of day."
"The initial setup was fairly complex."
"There is room for improvement needed around setting up the calendars and frequencies. I would like more flexibility in what jobs run. Sometimes, with frequencies, I can't find what I want to without putting a little more labor into it."
"It's not something you can just quickly grab, try, run, and play with. You have to get the knowledge and train yourself. It was easy for me, but I also took the time to throw myself into it. There is a learning curve to a certain extent. You have to learn the rules."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 4th in Workload Automation with 35 reviews while OpCon is ranked 9th in Workload Automation with 56 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while OpCon is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpCon writes "Gives us the ability to schedule dependent jobs across different mainframes". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, VisualCron and IBM Workload Automation, whereas OpCon is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation and UiPath. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. OpCon report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload Automation 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.
