We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and Fortra's JAMS 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 regarded for its ease of use and consistent performance. Fortra's JAMS stands out for its ability to track job dependencies, automate tasks, and provide extensive monitoring and control functions.
AppWorx Workload Automation has the potential to enhance its API integration and scalability. Fortra's JAMS requires improvements in various areas such as client interface, search capability, training resources, exception handling, browser version, custom execution methods, reporting, and documentation.
Service and Support: Customers have rated the technical support of AppWorx Workload Automation highly, while Fortra's JAMS has a responsive and knowledgeable support team.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for AppWorx Workload Automation may seem complex to those unfamiliar with the system, however, it is generally considered relatively easy and straightforward. It requires several months to complete and the involvement of an administrator with access. Fortra's JAMS has a straightforward and easy setup process. Users found it quick, simple, and intuitive, with some mentioning that it did not require formal training.
Pricing: AppWorx Workload Automation has a costly setup determined by the number of systems used, while Fortra's JAMS has a fair and reasonable pricing structure with an initial cost in the first year and an annual maintenance cost. Users consider JAMS to be affordable and a worthwhile investment.
ROI: Users have found that Fortra's JAMS delivers a considerable return on investment, resulting in time savings, enhanced productivity, and cost-effectiveness. It instills confidence in its ability to generate positive ROI. No ROI information was mentioned for AppWorx.
Comparison Results: Fortra's JAMS is highly favored over AppWorx Workload Automation. Users appreciate JAMS' ability to handle job dependencies, its automation capabilities, and the valuable features it provides, such as File Watchers and warnings for job issues. Users also find JAMS' pricing to be fair and reasonable compared to other solutions, resulting in a significant return on investment.
"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 interface is good."
"The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"It is really a robust product."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The scheduling and execution of jobs are the most valuable features. The scheduling is important because if there is a task we want to execute at 4:00 AM, there's no way we will have someone who can manually run the job. In addition, we execute 100 to 200 jobs per day, and manual intervention is not an option."
"I didn't know about JAMS because I don't have a person with any challenges with the purchase administration. The feature or the user interface is user-friendly because of the readable icons or very descriptive icons. Though I'm a beginning user of JAMS, I had no issues using it."
"The most valuable feature is the easily accessible data in the database because we run a lot of SQL scripting against the database."
"The code-driven automation for more complex scheduling requirements frees up time because it's really easy to use... It's almost like a stand-alone software that we can't live without."
"Being able to create a series of chained jobs, which are basically linked jobs is valuable."
"The product is easy to use."
"The ability to sequence jobs is excellent; it means we don't have to schedule them individually, and if one fails, it doesn't unwind the entire workflow."
"The fact that we no longer need to use Excel spreadsheets is huge. Before JAMS, every group was keeping track of their own batch jobs. Nobody really knew what the other jobs were. So, if jobs failed, other groups wouldn't necessarily know. With JAMS, everything is done through a single scheduler. You can choose who to notify."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"We are looking for additional features that would allow us to call APIs and integrate the product with other tools more effectively."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
"The scalability could improve."
"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."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"It does validations when you try to delete an object and if there are any dependencies in place, the deletion process will not proceed... there is no information provided as to what it was that caused the validation to fail... it's quite a tedious process to find which object is getting in the way."
"Sometimes the UI is not the most responsive I've ever used. But because it does its job, I don't complain."
"The search capability needs to be improved because when we try to search for a job, it's hard to do."
"I would like a simple web interface that I could give to my team to go in and kill jobs or see why jobs died so that we don't have to drill down deeper into the application and know everything about it. It would be good to have a really clean web engine that would say here are the jobs running. We can then click to see the time running and whether any of them fails and other similar things. I know they have one, but it's not very simplistic."
"The ACL or access permission area needs to be improved. When it comes to defining and providing security permissions, it's a bit confusing if you are new to JAMS. JAMS needs to improve the features for security access or permissions."
"JAMS lacks source control features. Our previous solution had job control language, but JAMS doesn't. When migrating between versions, JAMS doesn't migrate all the data, like job change history, etc. Also, the scheduler doesn't have a way to make jobs invisible, so you can temporarily turn a job off if you decide not to run it today."
"The biggest area with room for improvement is the area that my organization benefits the most from using JAMS, and that is in custom execution methods. I happen to have a very good C# developer. Ever since we got JAMS, he has spent a lot of time talking to JAMS developers, researching the JAMS libraries, and creating custom execution methods. He's gotten very good at it. He is now able to create them and maintain them very easily, but that knowledge was hard-won knowledge. It was difficult to come by, and if I should ever lose this developer, then I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who could create JAMS custom execution methods quite as well as he can since there really isn't all that much help, such as documentation or information, available on how to create custom execution methods."
"Fortra is getting much better with documentation and examples, but there is still room for improvement."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while Fortra's JAMS is ranked 5th in Workload Automation with 27 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while Fortra's JAMS is rated 9.0. 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 Fortra's JAMS writes "We can scale up our organization's scheduling and automation without having to add staff to the department". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Automic Workload Automation, Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch, whereas Fortra's JAMS is most compared with Control-M, Tidal by Redwood, AutoSys Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs and VisualCron. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. Fortra's JAMS 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.