Compare BMC TrueSight Server Automation vs. Control-M

BMC TrueSight Server Automation is ranked 5th in Configuration Management with 6 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 17 reviews. BMC TrueSight Server Automation is rated 8.8, while Control-M is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Server Automation writes "Works across multiple operating systems, enabling data collection without worrying about the underlying OS". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "File transfer module is quite advanced, this version has less need for written programs and is more GUI-based". BMC TrueSight Server Automation is most compared with Ansible, SCCM and Chef, whereas Control-M is most compared with CA Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: December 2019.
389,722 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
It gives us more speed to deliver services and applications, and we rely on security.The most important feature is the schedulings.The most valuable feature is its ability to remediate quickly and efficiently across a number of IT assets at the same time. It takes away manual efforts from the team to go out and fix those vulnerabilities through patching, conflict updates, etc.Among the most valuable features is its flexibility and ability to work across multiple operating systems. Being able to execute some form of data collection and not have to worry about whether I'm working on a Linux box, or a Windows box, or the underlying OS, I can do these collections, get these results, and put them together in a uniform format which makes it easier to present back to management.Compliance is also huge... By tying it to Atrium Orchestrator, our workflow tool, we'll be able to have a closed loop where we identify a compliance issue, cut CRs, get them approved, and then be able to execute these CRs and more seamlessly fix these issues on the fly.Technical support is good.It makes deployment easier and allows us to put restrictions on the server using role-based authorization.BladeLogic lets users view the filesystem with minimal authorization to the server.

Read more »

I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets.The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools.Most of our tasks also deal with databases, and Control-M's purpose-built module for the databases comes in very handy when handling database components.BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us.The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology.The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice.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.Monitoring is a valuable aspect of it. The monitoring tool is very good, and it is easy for expert and entry level users to use on a short notice.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to see more container integration in the next release of this solution.We would like to see this solution handle more multitasking.The number of APIs available within the tool needs improvement. At the moment, we have a couple of different scanning tools used within the organization, but only one of those is integrated back into Server Automation. There is another tool that they use in another part of the business where it doesn't have an out-of-the-box adaptor for it. We would have to go and create or develop something bespoke to be able to integrate it with that scanning tool. Whereas, with the other scanning tool, there was an API available. To make it easier, I would like to have more APIs available for different scanning tools within that line of business.I would like to see a better methodology for handling REST calls and integration into the APIs. They add new APIs as they add functions, but they've missed some from older components which they still haven't added in. Some of the APIs are there but the CLI calls are not there.Needs more use cases into compliance management and the remediation process.Provisioning needs to be more user-friendly. We were using BladeLogic for provisioning, but due to a lot of issues and complications, we had to stop using provisioning with this tool.

Read more »

There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly.The next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client.A developer sandbox could be very helpful to try out new features or experience them.The Control-M API does not support SQL database-type jobs, where a job has been configured to use the SQL catalog to locate SSIS.Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support.I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product.I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data.The reporting tool still needs a lot of improvement. It was supposed to get better with the upgrade, and it really didn't get better. It needs help, because it's such a useful thing to have. It needs to be more powerful and easier to use.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
We're looking at less than $100,000 USD for this solution.Licensing is a bit pricey. Be mindful about the components that you need and buy as appropriate.

Read more »

Licensing costs are around $3000 a year.Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for.It works on task-based licensing.This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations.We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing.As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost.We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost.we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
389,722 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
5th
Views
4,863
Comparisons
3,530
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
881
Avg. Rating
9.0
1st
out of 22 in Workload Automation
Views
28,445
Comparisons
12,197
Reviews
20
Average Words per Review
547
Avg. Rating
8.6
Top Comparisons
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Also Known As
TrueSight Server Automation, BladeLogic Server Automation, BladeLogic Automation SuiteControl-M
Learn
BMC
BMC
Overview

BladeLogic Server Automation allows you to quickly and securely provision, configure, patch, and maintain physical, virtual, and cloud servers. 

·         Threat remediation: Combine with BMC SecOps Response Service to link vulnerabilities to identified patches and create a remediation plan

·         Compliance: Integrates role-based access control, pre-configured policies for CIS, DISA, HIPAA, PCI, SOX, NIST, and SCAP, documentation, and remediation

·         Provisioning: Supports unattended installs and image-based, script-based, or template-based provisioning

·         Configuration: Consistently manage change and configuration activities across a broad range of server environments with one tool

·         Reporting: Assess change impact or complete an audit using multiple dashboard views

·         Patching: Supports and follows maintenance window guidelines to ensure timely delivery of patches

Control‑M is a digital enterprise management solution that simplifies and automates diverse batch application workloads while reducing failure rates, improving SLAs, and accelerating application deployment. 

Automate job scheduling and application deployment

  • Connect applications and workflow processes to quickly and reliably deliver business services
  • Realize the potential of big data while freeing IT for other tasks
  • Take control of your file transfer operations with secure scheduling, instant status visibility, and automated recovery
  • Accelerate application change and deployment cycle times with automated application workflow between test and production
  • Empower users to make decisions in real time and perform basic tasks in a view and language they understand
  • Deploy Control-M on-premises or on the cloud
Offer
Learn more about BMC TrueSight Server Automation
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
State of Michigan, Fujitsu FSAS, Transamerica Life Insurance Company, SAPCARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Government25%
Comms Service Provider13%
Pharma/Biotech Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company51%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm9%
Retailer5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm43%
Healthcare Company9%
Retailer9%
Insurance Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company38%
Marketing Services Firm9%
Financial Services Firm9%
Comms Service Provider7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Midsize Enterprise8%
Large Enterprise92%
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise75%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise1%
Large Enterprise98%
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: December 2019.
389,722 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Configuration Management 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.