Compare Chef vs. Control-M

Chef is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 13 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 17 reviews. Chef is rated 8.4, while Control-M is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Chef writes "It never uses any type of human-readable interface. Therefore, you don't have to go into a GUI nor use a command line tool". 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". Chef is most compared with SCCM, Ansible and BigFix, whereas Control-M is most compared with CA Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and Ansible.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Chef Logo
Read 13 Chef reviews.
5,626 views|4,074 comparisons
Control-M Logo
30,309 views|12,878 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: April 2020.
407,538 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
You set it and forget it. You don't have to worry about the reliability or the deviations from any of the other configurations.It streamlined our deployments and system configurations across the board rather than have us use multiple configurations or tools, basically a one stop shop.The scalability of the product is quite nice.The most valuable feature is the language that it uses: Ruby.This solution has improved my organization in the way that deployment has become very quick and orchestration is easy. If we have thousands of servers we can easily deploy in a small amount of time. We can deploy the applications or any kind of announcements in much less time.The most important thing is it can handle a 100,000 servers at the same time easily with no time constraints.Deployment has become quick and orchestration is now easy.It has been very easy to tie it into our build and deploy automation for production release work, etc. All the Chef pieces more or less run themselves.

Read more »

The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools.I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets.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 them to add database specific items, configuration items, and migration tools. Not necessarily on the builder side or the actual setup of the system, but more of a migration package for your different database sets, such as MongoDB, your extenders, etc. I want to see how that would function with a transition out to AWS for Aurora services and any of the RDBMS packages.The agent on the server sometimes acts finicky.I would like to see more security features for Chef and more automation.I would rate this solution a nine because our use case and whatever we need is there. Ten out of ten is perfect. We have to go to IOD and stuff so they should consider things like this to make it a ten.Since we are heading to IoT, this product should consider anything related to this.There is a slight barrier to entry if you are used to using Ansible, since it is Ruby-based.If they can improve their software to support Docker containers, it would be for the best.Third-party innovations need improvement, and I would like to see more integration with other platforms.

Read more »

The next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client.There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly.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
I wasn't involved in the purchasing, but I am pretty sure that we are happy with the current pricing and licensing since it never comes up.We are using the free, open source version of the software, which we are happy with at this time.Purchasing the solution from AWS Marketplace was a good experience. AWS's pricing is pretty in line with the product's regular pricing. Though instance-wise, AWS is not the cheapest in the market.We are able to save in development time, deployment time, and it makes it easier to manage the environments.The price is always a problem. It is high. There is room for improvement. I do like purchasing on the AWS Marketplace, but I would like the ability to negotiate and have some flexibility in the pricing on it.When we're rolling out a new server, we're not using the AWS Marketplace AMI, we're using our own AMI, but we are paying them a licensing fee.The price per node is a little weird. It doesn't scale along with your organization. If you're truly utilizing Chef to its fullest, then the number of nodes which are being utilized in any particular day might scale or change based on your Auto Scaling groups. How do you keep track of that or audit it? Then, how do you appropriately license it? It's difficult.

Read more »

Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for.Licensing costs are around $3000 a year.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.
407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
4th
Views
5,626
Comparisons
4,074
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
602
Avg. Rating
8.5
1st
out of 22 in Workload Automation
Views
30,309
Comparisons
12,878
Reviews
17
Average Words per Review
619
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Also Known As
Control-M
Learn
Chef
BMC
Overview

Chef, is the leader in DevOps, driving collaboration through code to automate infrastructure, security, compliance and applications. Chef provides a single path to production making it faster and safer to add value to applications and meet the demands of the customer. Deployed broadly in production by the Global 5000 and used by more than half of the Fortune 500, Chef develops 100 percent of its software as open source under the Apache 2.0 license with no restrictions on its use. Chef Enterprise Automation Stack™, a commercial distribution, is developed solely from that open source code and unifies security, compliance, infrastructure and application automation with observability. Chef provides an unequaled developer experience for the Coded Enterprise by enabling users to express infrastructure, security policies and the application lifecycle as code, modernizing development, packaging and delivery of any application to any platform. For more information, visit http://chef.io and follow @chef.

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 Chef
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
Facebook, Standard Bank, GE Capital, Nordstrom, Optum, Barclays, IGN, General Motors, Scholastic, Riot Games, NCR, GapCARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company33%
Comms Service Provider12%
Government7%
Retailer6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm42%
Healthcare Company8%
Retailer8%
Comms Service Provider6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company44%
Comms Service Provider9%
Marketing Services Firm6%
Insurance Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise27%
Large Enterprise60%
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise75%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business4%
Midsize Enterprise1%
Large Enterprise95%
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL, Microsoft, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: April 2020.
407,538 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.