Compare CA Automic Applications Manager vs. Stonebranch Universal Automation Center

CA Automic Applications Manager is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 2 reviews while Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is ranked 4th in Workload Automation with 20 reviews. CA Automic Applications Manager is rated 8.6, while Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is rated 9.2. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Stonebranch Universal Automation Center writes "These are the simplest agents to work with - I'm up and running within 30 minutes". CA Automic Applications Manager is most compared with Control-M, Automic Workload Automation and CA Workload Automation, whereas Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation. See our CA Automic Applications Manager vs. Stonebranch Universal Automation Center report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Automic Applications Manager vs. Stonebranch Universal Automation Center and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,397 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 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 »

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 »

The Universal Agent is the most valuable feature. Being agent-based and being able to go across multiple technology stacks, which is what our workflows do, Stonebranch gives us the ability to bridge those disparate technologies. It enables us to remove the dependency-gap with the agent so we know the status of the workflow at each step.This solution will monitor the return codes from all processes and alert us when something fails, whether or not a programmer has a test in the program to identify that problem. It has raised the visibility of these errors which we are working on to solve, making the code much more robust.It provides more visibility to developers. It has given us better visibility into failed tasks and jobs, so we're able to start working on solutions before production starts calling. This has saved us money. We are now able to be a lot more proactive instead of reactive. We are able to solve jobs without people screaming and staring at us while we're trying to solve the problem.The most valuable feature is the reliability of the agents, because we need them accessible and we need to run stuff. The agent technology and compatibility are top-notch.The ability to monitor tasks that are on the open-system side as well as our mainframe side gives us a one-window view of all our processes.I love the Universal Controller. It's been great for us. We host it on-premise... It's High Availability, meaning there's failover from one server to the other if one goes down.We lean a lot on the multi-tenancy that they offer within the product, the ability to get other people to self-manage their estate, versus having a central team do all the scheduling.When it comes to agent technology and compatibility with other vendors, from a platform perspective it was the one vendor that fit all the platforms that we have, from your old platforms - mainframe, NSK, IBM i - to the new ones, going into cloud and container

Read more »

Cons
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 »

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 »

Occasionally, we have an agent that doesn't come back up after patching. That doesn't happen very often... It's really just a restart of the agent and it comes back up. But that might be one thing that could be improved.We would like to run it in high availability in multiple clusters, but it has to read and write to one flat file. To us, that's a single point of failure that will prevent us from moving it to clustering like we would want to do.We would like the solution to work better with SSIS and SSRS. Right now, it just starts the job but does not give us any visibility into whether the job ran correctly or not. It tells us it started it, but it doesn't tell us how long it ran, any of the output, etc. We have lost that sort of visibility by going to Stonebranch.The Universal Controller is decent for the money it costs... It needs some work to have full features, compared to other products that are out there, specifically IBM's Workload Scheduler.I have a request regarding our agent on the mainframe. It may time out when communicating to the Universal Controller, when the mainframe is extremely busy. That can cause a task which is running at that time to not see the results of the job that ran on the mainframe. It happens sporadically during times of really busy CPU usage. We're expecting that enhancement from them in the fourth quarter.There is a component called the OMS, which is the message broker. We rely on infrastructure, resiliency, and availability for that piece. If that could change to be highly available just as a software component, so that we don't have to provide the high-available storage, etc. for it, that would be a plus. It would just be cheaper to run.One hiccup we've had is due to the fact that we have other internal scheduling tools. We're able to talk to them, but we have trouble with some of the networking between them, so we're still trying to work out the kinks there.

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 »

We're transaction-based, as far as our licensing goes. We have 50,000 transactions a month and our licensing cost is $55,000 a year...As new production servers are added, and if the Stonebranch capability is needed, we will add it. We do have more licenses.I don't have pricing information, but I do know it's cheaper than our old legacy system. Other than the standard licensing fees there are no additional costs.Outside of licensing fees, there aren't any other costs.When we reviewed this solution against other vendors, Stonebranch blew everybody out of the water in terms of cost.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
378,397 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
Automic Dollar Universe
Learn
CA (A Broadcom Company)
CA (A Broadcom Company)
Stonebranch
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.

Stonebranch provides efficient enterprise-wide workload automation software solutions that solve complex IT business processes in a simple way - from Amazon Web Services, Docker, Openstack, Hadoop, Microsoft Azure to z/OS batch processes on the mainframe.

Go with Stonebranch and automate IT business processes to achieve:

  1. Single “pane of glass” so your IT team control the status of all scripts, jobs, tasks, workflows running across all servers and VM machines.
  2. Reduce manual IT effort and increase efficiency via automated scheduling and execution of all jobs. No IT engineers manually executing tasks or scheduling activities locally on each VM.
  3. Automatic notifications and alerts (email, ticket, SNMP, SMS) if a workflow condition is not satisfied.
  4. Central repository, auditing and configuration management of all workflow logic, script definitions, job executions.
  5. Universal Automation Center provides the full hands-on experience on Premise and Cloud, get your free trial here.


Universal Automation Center (UAC) is a system of four enterprise workload automation products:

Universal Controller is the UAC workload automation and job scheduling software. A central component of the Controller is the integrated drag-and-drop workflow definition tool. This feature allows you to define workflows that closely model your business processes.

Universal Agent is a vendor-independent scheduling agent that collaborates with existing job scheduler(s) on all major computing platforms, both legacy and distributed. All schedulers that run on: z/Series, i/Series, UNIX, Linux, Windows are supported. Universal Agent can be deployed on your job scheduler server and on each machine in your environment where you need to execute batch workloads. The Agent is scheduled as a local task within your scheduler and communicates across your network to control the execution of work. Status and output are reported back to the job scheduler server in real time.

Universal Data Mover provides for the managed file transfer of files between servers and applications. UDM is a centralized and self-managing solution that provides a unified strategy for moving large files between legacy and distributed applications.

Universal Data Mover Gateway automates, secures and simplifies your B2B file transfer processes.

Offer
Learn more about Automic Workload Automation
Learn more about CA Automic Applications Manager
Learn more about Stonebranch Universal Automation Center
Sample Customers
ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
Information Not Available
Nissan, Coop, United Supermarkets, Groupon, CSC, Orbitz, Johnson & Johnson, BMW, Qantas.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm35%
Manufacturing Company14%
Insurance Company9%
Retailer7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company24%
Financial Services Firm22%
Government11%
Marketing Services Firm8%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm50%
Insurance Company19%
Retailer13%
Transportation Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm30%
Software R&D Company22%
Insurance Company11%
Comms Service Provider5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise71%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise84%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise81%
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Automic Applications Manager vs. Stonebranch Universal Automation Center and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,397 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