We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AppWorx Workload Automation is highly praised for its easy-to-use interface and dependable performance. Users appreciate its simplicity and efficiency in managing nightly tasks and performing calculations. Automic Workload Automation is known for its impressive strength, scalability, and seamless integration. It offers seamless control over various operating systems and products, along with pre-defined templates and convenient web browser access.
The users recommend that AppWorx Workload Automation should focus on improving API integration, integration with other tools, and scalability. Automic Workload Automation needs enhancements in automation sets, language support, functionality, user interface, web-based edition, file transfer, pricing, and support.
Service and Support: AppWorx Workload Automation has been praised for its customer service and highly rated technical support. Automic Workload Automation has received mixed feedback, with some customers praising the support while others have faced challenges in reaching the team.
Ease of Deployment: AppWorx Workload Automation's initial setup is considered relatively easy. However, it can be a time-consuming process. Administrator access and involvement are necessary for the setup. Automic Workload Automation's setup time and complexity can vary. It can be completed within one to five days, depending on the specific requirements.
Pricing: AppWorx Workload Automation has a costly setup determined by the number of orchestrated systems used. Automic Workload Automation has made pricing and licensing changes, making it more affordable. It is considered one of the most expensive options on the market, as the cost depends on the number of systems being orchestrated.
ROI: There are no specific details about the ROI for AppWorx Workload Automation. Users mentioned Automic Workload Automation was not renewed due to cost-cutting measures, indicating it was seen as an extra cost.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred choice over AppWorx Workload Automation. Users appreciate its robustness, scalability, and ease of implementation. They also commend its extensive features and user-friendly interface. Automic Workload Automation offers a versatile single solution that can handle different use cases without requiring additional tools.
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"It is an object-based approach to task and process design in conjunction with conditional logic and event-based scheduling actions, which enables a build once/use often design methodology to be employed."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The interface is good."
"It is really a robust product."
"It has improved my organization through automation of back office and infrastructure procedures, and by integrating and orchestrating key business applications spanning multiple technology stacks."
"I use this automation solution, because it is very flexible. This automation solution supports a lot of computer platforms. Also, a lot of operating systems are supported other than automation solutions."
"Integration with most of the platforms that we have within the company's Windows, Linux, and Unix. Integrating these inside the automation agent for scheduling, backups, file transfer, and SAP jobs."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler."
"Automic is perfect to work with for a lot of job loads."
"The most valuable features are the predefined templates for application-specific jobs and the access for different users."
"It has its own object-oriented scripting language and you can reload your object in many different places."
"It's easy to use. When you schedule jobs, if you can speak English you can schedule them easily and correctly. Also, there's a lot of flexibility because the product allows you to do many tasks, in multiple ways, so you can choose the way that works best for your environment."
"I like that Automic Workload Automation has many features compared to other products. There are a lot of good features, and architecture-wise there is a valuable client concept. The architecture and the multi-tenancy is a multi-client concept. That is also useful."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"The scalability could improve."
"It is not really scaling per say because they are not putting much into it. They are trying to push their new product."
"It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD)."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"It has been a deprecated product, because it is so old. There has been a couple of new solutions that are a little more advanced."
"We are looking for additional features that would allow us to call APIs and integrate the product with other tools more effectively."
"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
"I would like a good AWI in the next release. The AWI is not fully functional at this time."
"The direction in which the UI is going is concerning to me. It does not offer the security context we would need to implement future versions. While I see benefit in the Web UI, the security it would lack in separating a user's experience from an administrator's experience is an issue for us. MFA functionality is required since we're dealing with connectivity to the POS and for PCI/SOX compliance."
"A little less button clicking, in the navigation of the tool itself would also help. There is a lot out there, and I understand that's what keeps the tool robust. It keeps our options open, but it's a bit click-y sometimes. To get where you need to go, you have to go through 10 levels."
"The only thing that we would like improved is the FTP agent. It only supports SOCKS proxy, and we would like it to also support an HTTP proxy."
"Documentation is not great. It was previously much better."
"Our area with the CA solution for DR is not really concerning directly to Automic, but to all of the DevOps, a word which is something that everybody is trying to touch on today in their daily business. There is also some gap that's a little bit hard to understand or to implement because not all the organizations are the same. When you are adopting DevOps, you may need to be more flexible in your processes."
"The web-based edition is missing a lot of the most important features available in Automic, we have absence. For example, when I'm scheduling a job, there is normally a flag that you can toggle to activate and deactivate the task, but that doesn't work properly in the web version. It's missing a lot of the calendar and scheduling features."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch, whereas Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. Automic Workload Automation 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.
Hello Rick, I couldn't help you with the Appwork applications manager.
On the other hand, one thing that is certain that
we are satisfied to have migrated all our jobs processing under OpCon (120 000
jobs/days) since 2018.
We have improved in terms
of service quality, we have made progress in the automation of our business
process and we benefit from more functionalities and reduces operating costs.
OpCon is a true
Enterprise Scheduler.
I hope this will help you in your
research.
Ian,
It isn't that AWA wont work. It comes down to support from another vendor. The vendor isn't currently familiar with AWA, so they are taking classes, and will be able to support it in the future
We are about to start to use AWA and was wondering why that platform will not work for you going forward?
@NickWilcox you recently reviewed OpCon - would you be willing to share your experiences with @Rick Murray to help him with his decision? @reviewer1166826 maybe you can give some insight into the pros and cons of AppWorx?
I am sorry because cannot help you. We have no experience with Appworx Application Manager.