Automic Workload Automation vs. CA Automic Applications Manager

As of June 2019, Automic Workload Automation is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 64 reviews vs CA Automic Applications Manager which is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 2 reviews. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "It's one of the most important systems in our operation today". The top reviewer of CA Automic Applications Manager writes "The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with CA Workload Automation, Control-M and Ansible. CA Automic Applications Manager is most compared with Control-M, CA Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. CA Automic Applications Manager report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Workload Automation vs. CA Automic Applications Manager and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
348,558 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
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.The solution helped us fix issues and optimize them. We now run with zero errors.

Read more »

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 automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server.It is really a robust product.

Read more »

Cons
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.During installation, some database elective issues popped up. These took some time to fix, but after some back and forth communication, these issues were resolved.

Read more »

As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite.The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups.It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD).It is not really scaling per say because they are not putting much into it. They are trying to push their new product.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.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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 »

Licensing options are fairly straightforward.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
348,558 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
out of 18 in Workload Automation
Views
11,298
Comparisons
3,493
Reviews
64
Average Words per Review
592
Avg. Rating
8.3
7th
out of 18 in Workload Automation
Views
327
Comparisons
209
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
402
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
Automic Dollar Universe
Learn
CA Technologies
CA Technologies
Overview

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.

CA Automic Applications Manager automates your Ellucian’s Banner or Fiserv DNA processing. This innovative, best-in-class task scheduling solution accelerates your processing, provides visibility and control over business processes and mitigates risk in both environments.

Offer
Learn more about Automic Workload Automation
Learn more about CA Automic Applications Manager
Sample Customers
ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
Information Not Available
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm35%
Manufacturing Company14%
Insurance Company9%
Comms Service Provider7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm40%
Government15%
Marketing Services Firm13%
Insurance Company6%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise71%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise86%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Workload Automation vs. CA Automic Applications Manager and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
348,558 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.

Sign Up with Email