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.
"The interface is good."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"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."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"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."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"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."
"Fortra's JAMS helped us centralize job management across our platforms and applications. This is critical because we schedule tasks across multiple applications and operating systems, using triggers and start dates to coordinate their execution."
"The product is easy to use."
"I like how you can add new execution methods on the fly. It isn't overly complex to add Python script support to an execution method in the JAMS system. The scheduling is excellent. You can schedule a maintenance window and take that resource unit out of everything. It halts all of the jobs."
"The overall product is fantastic. I love it. It has been a fantastic, solid product. If I have one tiny bit of a problem with it, the support team gets in touch with me right away. I don't know if I've had another service that has been as fantastic as the JAMS support team."
"The alerting in it is really targeted... you can set specific alerting so that if jobs in a given folder fail, certain people are alerted. You can also set security at the folder level, so that only people in those areas can go set them. That means that the alerting and security can be set at a very granular level."
"One of the things I like the most, as a SQL DBA, is the fact that we can manipulate tables in the background. Also, the fact that you can have your own views and work with the product the way it fits best is a very helpful feature."
"The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful."
"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."
"It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD)."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"The scalability could improve."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
"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."
"Sometimes the UI is not the most responsive I've ever used. But because it does its job, I don't complain."
"I would like to see the ability to interface with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, but they're still in the research phase. They need to ensure everything's legit and safe. The report designer and dashboards could also be improved. We're running 7.3, so I don't know if they have updated the reporting in 7.5, but I think the reports and dashboards could be better."
"We have had a lot of people working from home who can't always connect to the JAMS server. We use VPN, as most companies do, and we have it set up so that everybody can access the JAMS server. But many times, our people cannot access it... JAMS could do a better job of telling you what the problem is when you try to log in to the server."
"There could be a better simulation for banning the termination. You have to simulate every one of the processes in order to have an idea for better planning. This kind of simulation is broken and needs improvement."
"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."
"With no programming experience, I find JAMS code-driven automation challenging due to the required PowerShell scripting."
"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."
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.
