We performed a comparison between CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] and ServiceNow Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda, Pega, Appian and others in Process Automation."The product is stable. This is the reason that we are using Automic, in some cases, because of its stability and features."
"Jobs are planned automatically to eliminate the need to plan them manually. It also saves us effort because there is no need to create job objects manually."
"If I have a higher workload with smaller machines, it is easy to increase everything."
"It provides a simple reduction of headcount and also a reduction of run through time."
"The iTerm suite is also crucial for visibility and optimization."
"Great with IT processes and business processes."
"This is a user-friendly solution where scripts can be made with ease. There are also many integration options, including Microsoft products, which gives the product a competitive edge."
"Orchestration is commonly utilized by major corporations. The process of linking methods in ServiceNow, known as the RTS chain to parent methods, is executed seamlessly and efficiently. It's quite impressive and significant in its impact."
"The interface of the solution is very user friendly and it is easily accessible via a simple URL. This makes it easier to complete the UI based tasks but using other features require expertise in languages like Java. But along with that, there are limitation in terms of network connectivity testing and administrator faces regular challenges in conducting connectivity tests due to these limitations."
"It's scalable."
"The solution effectively automates business processes."
"The data visualization is good."
"What I am missing today is robotics. If Automic would like to stay as one of the biggest automation engines on the market, they have to find an option with a robotics solution."
"In the last two years or so, Automic has not invested as much in the product as we would have expected."
"Efficiency of some features could be improved."
"The deployment requires awareness among the project staff."
"We cannot perform GUI automation using the tool."
"The flow rate for releases and updates is very, very slow and does not meet customers' objectives for scalability."
"From my space, the only thing that I can say is the spinning up with Google Cloud Services."
"The automatic remediation needs enhancement, particularly integrating ServiceNow with tools like SolarWinds and Logic Monitor. It is functional, but it needs improvement."
"Frequent upgrades may negatively impact the performance of instances. Therefore, for now, I don't recommend any additional upgrades."
"There should be connectors to cover at least the top industry applications, and they should be easier to configure in a plug-and-play fashion."
More CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Process Automation while ServiceNow Orchestration is ranked 13th in Process Automation with 12 reviews. CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is rated 10.0, while ServiceNow Orchestration is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] writes "Automation of job object creation increased the quality and quantity of our job requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Orchestration writes "Fastest upgrading technology in the market currently". CA Automic Service Orchestration [EOL] is most compared with , whereas ServiceNow Orchestration is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Control-M, Nintex Process Platform and BMC TrueSight Orchestration.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
