We performed a comparison between Automic Continuous Delivery Automation and Control-M based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation."The main benefit is you can deploy everything with it."
"I think on a day-to-day basis, it has increased the capacity to deploy. We don't have to wait for someone to do something."
"The IT process automation is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"Deployment workflow (WF) can be designed this way, so that it is not necessary to provide all applications (systems) artifacts of which an application consists."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"The capability to provide visibility to the stakeholders, to management, is the biggest piece that showcases what the solution is about."
"It is an umbrella system that allows us to integrate many different systems into our heterogeneous environment."
"We are using Control-M for day-to-day operations only. It is helpful for us in our day-to-day operations. It is a key in our financial sector. We are automating via Control-M in our treasury operations, including any evening updates. Control-M makes things easier and faster by helping our treasury operations go without any interruptions."
"Ability to handle files remotely through the advanced file transfer feature."
"It gives us the ability to have end-to-end workflows, no matter where they're running."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"The multiple scheduling options allow you to do anything you want, whenever you want, and however you want. You can easily be in control when things happen."
"I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets."
"It has multiple features. You can plan your execution in Control-M. It provides one single window where you can define workflows regardless of geographic boundaries and platforms. A batch process can be executed from this single window. It provides insights into your processes. Your business people will know what process they are running and what is the state of the process. Instead of knowing that they're not going to meet the SLA the next morning, the business people immediately know the changes in their process. Control-M is very easy. I can tell a non-technical person that this is how it works, and he would be able to easily understand it. Business people can understand the methodology of Control-M and the intuitive features that it has. It has a fantastic graphical user interface and is easy to understand. You just have to drag and drop but in a very intuitive way. Monitoring features are also good. It has different color coding schemes, which can help you to understand the status of your workflow. An operator who is not that technical and is just monitoring the status of the application can see by color-coding the status of a process. If anything goes wrong or a process is stuck, it gives you a hint. You can just right-click and see the logs and the output. Even if the system is not right there in the data center and is located somewhere else, you can monitor it right from there and see the workflows."
"Control-M is useful to automate all critical and non-critical processes. Using Control-M, we can automate application workflows as well as file transfers involved in application workflows. We can also use it to run batches related to applications. Automating these processes reduces the RTO and RPO, which helps in the case of failures. It also helps us to identify bottlenecks and take corrective measures."
"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."
"The stability of the solution can be improved."
"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."
"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."
"key thing is support for cloud-based deployment. That is lacking."
"I would like to see more support for WebSphere."
"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."
"One of the biggest features I've been asked by my team to put in there is opening more scripting languages to be part of the platform. There is a little bit of a learning curve in learning how to code some of the workflows in Automic at this time. If widely used languages like Perl and Python were integrated, on top of what's already there, the proprietary language, it would make it easier to on-board new resources."
"I would like to see more audit report templates added, and perhaps more customizability in terms of reporting."
"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."
"They can give more predefined plug-ins so that we don't have to create them."
"We develop software. More frequently, we are working with microservices and APIs, using our integration tool, MuleSoft. While Control-M is really a good tool to integrate with other tools, it is important for them to continue improving their microservices and API."
"They can improve their interface."
"I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product."
"There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go."
"Consider adding a mobile application for remote management."
More Automic Continuous Delivery Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is ranked 17th in Release Automation while Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews. Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is rated 8.0, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation writes "Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is most compared with UrbanCode Deploy, Nolio Release Automation and Microsoft Azure DevOps, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation.
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.
