Compare Control-M vs. Operations Orchestration

Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 22 reviews while Operations Orchestration is ranked 11th in Process Automation with 1 review. Control-M is rated 8.6, while Operations Orchestration is rated 6.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Operations Orchestration writes "It has alacrity, but lacks ability to scale". Control-M is most compared with CA Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation, whereas Operations Orchestration is most compared with Ansible, BMC TrueSight Orchestration and Puppet Enterprise.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Control-M Logo
25,407 views|11,265 comparisons
Operations Orchestration Logo
5,306 views|3,842 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, CA Technologies, Stonebranch and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2019.
365,533 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
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 »

It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options.

Read more »

Cons
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 »

There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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 »

I do not have experience with the pricing or licensing of the product.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
365,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
out of 21 in Workload Automation
Views
25,407
Comparisons
11,265
Reviews
21
Average Words per Review
523
Avg. Rating
8.7
11th
out of 32 in Process Automation
Views
5,306
Comparisons
3,842
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
381
Avg. Rating
6.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 36% of the time.
Also Known As
Control-MMicro Focus Operations Orchestration, HPOO, HPE Operations Orchestration
Learn
BMC
Micro Focus
Overview

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

Micro Focus Operations Orchestration is the next-generation IT Process Automation solution for those businesses who want to automate their processes, operations, and IT tasks from the data center to the cloud. This solution allows IT to focus on innovation instead of on mundane tasks, and has many business benefits, which are discussed in detail below.

Micro Focus Operations Orchestration supports multiple IT domains, such as Cloud, Virtualization, SAP Orchestration, Security Ops, and Dev/Ops.

Offer
Learn more about Control-M
Learn more about Operations Orchestration
Sample Customers
CARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum Casablanca INT, Internet Initiative Japan, Railway Information Systems, Samsung SDS, and Turkcell.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm42%
Healthcare Company9%
Retailer9%
Insurance Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Financial Services Firm15%
Marketing Services Firm14%
Manufacturing Company7%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider25%
Financial Services Firm17%
Engineering Company8%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise78%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise2%
Large Enterprise97%
REVIEWERS
Small Business18%
Large Enterprise82%
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, CA Technologies, Stonebranch and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2019.
365,533 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