Compare Automic Continuous Delivery Automation vs. Automic Workload Automation

Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 4th in Release Automation with 7 reviews while Automic Workload Automation is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 50 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it, but everybody has to need to use this tool in the organization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "Handling SAP processes is very easy, while distributed architecture keeps jobs running". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with Ansible, CA Release Automation and Control-M, whereas Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, CA Workload Automation and Ansible.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Microsoft, Chef and others in Release Automation. Updated: February 2020.
397,983 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The event monitor is very good. You can monitor when the file is created so you can pick up the file once it's done.It is an umbrella system that allows us to integrate many different systems into our heterogeneous environment.The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it.It can support very complex environments and dependencies.It gives us good feedback on visualizations and on how our processes have progressed.The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment.The product provides efficiency, in terms time, cost, and resources.It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use.

Read more »

The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler.I have found new methods for converting scripts from Dollar U to ONE Automation. For example, I take the dynamic library from Dollar U and put it in the dynamic binary library in ONE Automation. This enables us to use Dollar U scripts in ONE Automation.The most valuable feature is the one for SAP batch processing... There are certain other mid-level workload automation tools which can handle the OS level, but SAP is something which is really very critical. Automic stands out from the ordinary tools because handling SAP processes is absolutely easy with it.It saves a lot of time and mistakes, because we used to do a lot of manual work. Since we added automation a little bit over a year now, it has enhanced our daily work.We automate very manual, robust tasks, which are very time consuming and not error-free.We impose some standards for backup and restore operations.An important feature is the ability to modify PeopleSoft Run Controls at run-time.It's pretty stable. After implementation, there hasn't been a single event where we shifted our jobs for the day from automated to manual.

Read more »

Cons
There needs to be better error handling and error descriptions. It should be more clear what the errors are and what we can do to fix them.It would be very beneficial for us to see integrations into cloud environments, especially into the Google Cloud environment because we are heading towards cloud.There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system.If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details.At the moment, the version that we are using (version 12.0), the environment is complex with multiple installations. Therefore, the monitoring is not scalable, but this should be improved in 12.1 and 12.2.We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together.The dashboard should allow you to see the current state of packages in each environment, not only on an individual application basis, but across the entire application platform.

Read more »

I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution.There were many bugs in the last version. For example, we could only use capital letters for searching for agent names. Also, we had a problem with ONE Automation where we couldn't use the PGA and SGA in Oracle Databases for resolving RAM because the last version didn't have this capability.There are certain jobs that are triggered one after another. It would be helpful to have a more user-friendly way of seeing how these jobs are connecting from one server to another.Depending on the properties of the jobs and pre- and post-conditions, there needs to be more flexible and richer conditions that I can check for. This would be a great addition.There could be a better user interface for end users. They should make it more intuitive, not based on Java.With every new version, things that would previously work, Automic breaks them. So, we have to report the new bugs. Therefore, every time when we patch the system, there is usually a new bug or a feature that was working, then it stops working.There are some scripting elements that could be added.Some of the things we don't do are mainly because we don't know how to do them. Hands-on training can be expensive, so we find other ways to work around things to forgo the hands-on training. It is also an issue because we are a Linux shop and most trainers are Windows-based.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
If you have a fixed contract, it has limits to spreading out. If you have a flexible enterprise license contract, then you have a lot of scalability for this tool.I can save time and money more quickly.We increased our quality and reduced our time costs.

Read more »

I only know that AWA is cheaper than Control-M, but I'm not aware of the numbers.Certain licenses can be a bit expensive. The PeopleSoft agents, in particular, are a bit pricey.This is a support system for us, not our core business, so we purchased this product inexpensively.We came to a very good deal, but it took us three years to finalize.We have increased efficiency with this application.We receive time efficiency from this product.Every time there is a task which must be repeated, the solution can reduce costs.There are a lot of new features, but we do not use them because they are too expensive. The price point could be less.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Release Automation solutions are best for your needs.
397,983 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
4th
out of 28 in Release Automation
Views
3,042
Comparisons
1,485
Reviews
6
Average Words per Review
403
Avg. Rating
8.0
2nd
out of 22 in Workload Automation
Views
11,788
Comparisons
4,426
Reviews
52
Average Words per Review
540
Avg. Rating
8.2
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
CA Continuous Delivery Automation, Automic Release Automation, Automic ONE Automation, UC4 Automation PlatformAutomic Dollar Universe
Learn
Broadcom
Broadcom
Overview

Deliver apps at pace with agile development and let customer satisfaction soar. 

Today, the pressure is on to transform how you deliver applications to market. Get release agility and speed without compromising quality and stability with CA Continuous Delivery Automation. Deliver apps reliably on demand from development through production—mobile to mainframe. Agilely scale as the cadence, volume and complexity of your apps grow. It’s DevOps-ready release management and automation for your dynamic enterprise.

Deliver the fully agile enterprise using CA Automic Workload Automation 

The modern enterprise needs to orchestrate a complex, diverse landscape of applications, platforms and technologies. Workload automation can prove a critical differentiator, but only if it provides intelligent automation driven by data analytics.

The IT landscape is currently more complex than ever: Islands of automation are a barrier to scaling and standardizing your workload activities. Processing errors are common because of manual handoffs. And the lack of an end-to-end view of the business process make inefficiencies and problems difficult to resolve. In addition to this, you are operating 24x7 and cannot find maintenance windows to upgrade your infrastructure in order to innovate. 

CA Automic Workload Automation gives you the agility, speed, visibility and scalability needed to respond to the constantly changing technology landscape. It centrally manages and automates the execution of business processes end-to-end; across mainframe, cloud and hybrid environments in a way that never stops—even when doing an upgrade to the next version.

Offer
Learn more about Automic Continuous Delivery Automation
Learn more about Automic Workload Automation
Sample Customers
BET365, Charter Communications, TASCING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm50%
Retailer25%
Energy/Utilities Company13%
Transportation Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Marketing Services Firm28%
Software R&D Company15%
Comms Service Provider13%
Transportation Company7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm34%
Manufacturing Company16%
Insurance Company9%
Comms Service Provider7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Financial Services Firm18%
Government9%
Marketing Services Firm7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business9%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise82%
REVIEWERS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise70%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise86%
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Microsoft, Chef and others in Release Automation. Updated: February 2020.
397,983 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Release 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.