We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."The scalability is very good. We can scale it however we want."
"It is reliable. We have never had any unplanned crashes."
"We use the FTP agent excessively, and the connection is easy to handle between our company and the outside."
"It will improve how we function. It is just meeting a functional need in a maybe more agile way; it is faster."
"Both the stability and the scalability of Automic Workload Automation are great."
"Customers save a lot of money when they use this product, because of things like the scheduling tool."
"It is not possible do our jobs without automation software. Automic is a great help to us."
"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline."
"A job skeleton can be used from test to production so you don't have to build jobs from scratch in production."
"The Advanced Workflow Engine it comes with is brilliant because it allows us to create scripts and perform behind-the-scenes jobs that would otherwise require a third-party solution... You would have to create a special code on the outside to get all that other stuff done in the background. With Globalscape, we can get all of that done in one package."
"The most valuable feature is the automation engine, because it allows you to script or program and it has lots of different features and options. It's something like an IDE for programmers, where they can add variables, arrays, loops, et cetera."
"The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product."
"It made things easier. Before, there were five to 10 different software solutions spread out over 10 different servers. Now, everything is being centralized into one location; facilitating, supporting, maintaining, training people, etc. There have been gains just because Globalscape EFT is more efficient at moving things around than our previous other applications. For instance, if I am connecting to someone over the Internet or transmitting for the client, the speed of transmitting those files through SFTP is 20% to 30% faster than our previous automated solution. Therefore, we have seen time savings."
"The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product."
"Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us."
"The Event Rules functionality is a key feature. It is very simple to understand and work with. If you have a support team that doesn't know anything about coding, they can really relate to the way event rules are designed. So, I try to make them as simplistic as possible when we create file transmissions. When I first started working in Globalscape, a lot of the file transmissions were handled through Advanced Workflow, which is a similar product. We had a lot of scripts in Advanced Workflow. I moved them to Event Viewer in Globalscape because of the simplicity of building scripts and understanding how they work. It literally takes 5 to 10 minutes to set one up, but if you're in an advanced workflow, it could take an hour to two hours to understand via code what it is actually doing. It has definitely been a plus."
"This solution's out-of-box automation sets could be improved. They could be industry standardized out-of-box, or even runbook automation processes could be useful—just some plug-and-play automation processes out-of-box. It has many integration capabilities, from APIs to databases, but if the customer sees some out-of-box automation processes in it, it could be useful."
"There are some scripting elements that could be added."
"When there's an error or a problem, the automation part of it could be easily programmed to escalate it up to the developers or whoever is going to work on it. We had to home-grow that within the product because third-party products are so expensive."
"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."
"Today, we use a rich client for this product. In the future, or for the next release, they will be using a web interface. This web interface is not as scalable as the rich client for us. The web client is not 100 percent programmed as we need it."
"The pricing has the potential to be high."
"It is very difficult to migrate. The release automation should be in one package."
"There is one missing part in the product concerning recurring tasks. You can schedule a recurring task by a context action, and run it as recurrent, but it creates a time container which can be quit and disappears."
"There are two ways to install Globalscape: as a standalone server or as a high-availability server, either Active-Active or Active-Standby. We are currently using standalone servers. That means if we want to upgrade the software, I shut down one of the two back-end servers, upgrade the software, make sure everything is correct, and then turn traffic back on to that one. I then proceed to upgrade the second server. With their high-availability solution, that is not a possibility. Both servers have to be shut down to perform the upgrade. We're a 24/7 shop. We don't have a window where we can have downtime."
"In the beginning, it could be considered a bit challenging."
"I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both."
"It could improve its operations by incorporating real-time collaboration features like those offered by platforms such as Microsoft OneDrive and Office 365."
"The solution lags a bit when thousands of jobs, multiple users, and multiple developers are accessing it at the same time."
"Another area for improvement is the ARM (Auditing and Reporting Module) database, in terms of accuracy and the data being logged."
"Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software."
"The folder monitoring services need improvement. Currently, with the folder monitoring services in Globalscape, if any changes are made to our firewalls, network, or something else that affects the directory services where the files are located, for some reason, the folder monitoring services get cut out, and the files are left there. They remain in the folder without being sent. I have over 50 file transmission processes that I would have to go to manually re-drop a file into the folder so that it processes the file transmission. There are times where even though I re-drop a file, it still doesn't work. In that case, I have to resynchronize the folder monitoring process, and it is a very big headache on my side that I have to deal with. It is not only related to Globalscape or their development team. It is on our side too. I just sent a support case where we found out yesterday that we had a file transmission that hasn't run in a whole year, and it was an important one. No one on the business side or the IT support side, as well as the vendor, had indicated that the file wasn't received or the data hadn't been updated. I found out that it was the folder monitoring service that was the problem when I initially had the problem last October, and this was the file that I just missed. So, I re-dropped the file in yesterday, and the monitor worked. It runs every week, so we sent a file to that folder, and it processed that out."
More Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is ranked 12th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 10 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer writes "Rock solid, secure, and excellent price and quality of service". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and AppWorx Workload Automation, whereas Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, WS_FTP Server, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, JSCAPE by Redwood and BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer.
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.
