The visibility and control features are somewhat limited. This is a recognized weakness, but thee vendor is currently revamping the user interface to address it. While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement. AutoSys Workload Automation has some areas for improvement, particularly in housekeeping and product maintenance. These tasks are currently quite manual and labor-intensive for our team. Additionally, the reporting and forecasting functionalities could be more robust. One area for improvement with AutoSys Workload Automation is that it comprises several distinct tools configured to work together. This necessitates familiarity with multiple tools for effective solution management. Consequently, it can sometimes lack a sense of cohesiveness as a unified solution.
Application Support Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-10-11T17:00:25Z
Oct 11, 2023
There is a recently made change in AutoSys Workload Automation's subscription model. The solution does not have a friendly subscription model because it forces users to take a five-year subscription simultaneously, charging millions of dollars. Hence, our managers are looking for alternatives to AutoSys Workload Automation.
It would be helpful to be able to monitor and manage workload windows so we could minimize downstream applications. This would allow us easier access to the applications.
Technical Analyst at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
2022-10-03T13:36:43Z
Oct 3, 2022
An area for improvement in AutoSys Workload Automation is that it lacks advanced features or advanced built-in functionalities found in competitors, for example, an advanced workflow feature. Even the handling or notification from AutoSys Workload Automation isn't the best in the industry. Other products have very good workflow-related functionalities such as ActiveBatch that's missing in AutoSys Workload Automation, so I wish the tool had those features.
There should be easier migrations from a different bus scheduler. Prior to this workload, we were using BMC control M and the migration was really hard. We had to manually create the jobs and there was no sort of automation for the migration. Workload Automation could improve the handling of file transfer jobs. Compared to control M, control M allows multiple file transfers. It can have five types of files that can be transferred. They have different file formats or different sizes. You can configure it in control M. Here, you only have one and three for file transfer. A lot of times you also encounter issues with SSL crypto in conflict on certain jobs. Basically, the newer servers have newer security measures and currently, the product is not compatible with them.
IT consultant at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Consultant
2022-05-03T06:57:00Z
May 3, 2022
AutoSys Workload Automation could improve in the Linux environment. The previous versions of the AutoSys Workload Automation let you take the profile of the user that you were using to run the tasks that you're going to automate, but in the latest versions, you can't do that, you need to make more definitions and it's a little bit difficult. It was easier in the previous versions. In an upcoming release, AutoSys Workload Automation could include more integrations capabilities. I have seen other tools that have native integrations with other tools, such as Docker and other services in the cloud. They are not taking this into account in AutoSys Workload Automation.
Executive Director at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2021-12-02T11:28:40Z
Dec 2, 2021
We are trying to see if we can use this from a cloud perspective with AWS, Azure, and other clouds, but it seems that there is no cloud integration in this product. We would like to see cloud integration. We are very pleased with this solution, but we are moving our application to the cloud, and we found out that it doesn't support any cloud features. So, we are trying to find a replacement.
Problem and Technical Application Management for KNAB at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
MSP
2021-07-27T14:45:00Z
Jul 27, 2021
If you do not need the latest features like cloud and compare, I would really advise using AutoSys. For future technologies, I cannot answer the question yet. In terms of what should be in the next release, I want integration and AI and so on. I'd like easy reporting where you can compare information, for example, "that job normally takes three minutes and last time it took six minutes or 10 minutes." Then you can get the information to the engineer of which job is taking more time than normal - understanding strange behavior compared to the baseline.
Support definitely needs improvement. It's possible they're in some kind of transition so I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt but it's an issue. The pricing is definitely something they should look at, it's quite expensive. Finally, the latest features like the quick searching or better reporting and analysis of the jobs which are running in, needs to be improved. It's a great product but with the latest feature set there is a large scope for improvement. From a manageability point of view, the easy upgrade should be included and the frequent feature update too. Reporting and notifications need to be improved too, these are important things.
System Architect at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
2018-10-21T07:40:00Z
Oct 21, 2018
The installation process is complex, and is pretty archaic. The people who developed this had very little concern with GUI interface and it is all command line. Everything is K-space, and if you misspell a task by uppercase, lower case, etc. you just completely think that the task is different.
IT Process Automation Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2018-07-03T06:10:00Z
Jul 3, 2018
We see improvement possibilities in the processing provision of predefined evaluations or individual objects, or in the Self Service portal, which can be used by any user to monitor objects or start objects.
Enterprise IT Management Consultant with 51-200 employees
Vendor
2016-03-09T08:04:00Z
Mar 9, 2016
Despite the commitment of the development team to improve the UI since version 11.3, the WCC module still lacks true quality. There are still too many screens and the use cases need to be handled in a more "compact" way. I have not seen the v12 product yet. Note that this product is now a legacy product with a dwindling user base and support. Do not consider for a green site implementation
AutoSys Workload Automation delivers end-to-end visibility of application workloads and dependencies across platforms, ERP systems, and the cloud. Thanks to event-based triggering, real-time alerting, and dynamic critical path management, business applications are ensured for availability.
By intelligently and effectively assigning workloads based on real-time information about the available computing resources and service level agreements, AutoSys Workload Automation scales to enterprise...
The visibility and control features are somewhat limited. This is a recognized weakness, but thee vendor is currently revamping the user interface to address it. While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement. AutoSys Workload Automation has some areas for improvement, particularly in housekeeping and product maintenance. These tasks are currently quite manual and labor-intensive for our team. Additionally, the reporting and forecasting functionalities could be more robust. One area for improvement with AutoSys Workload Automation is that it comprises several distinct tools configured to work together. This necessitates familiarity with multiple tools for effective solution management. Consequently, it can sometimes lack a sense of cohesiveness as a unified solution.
There is a recently made change in AutoSys Workload Automation's subscription model. The solution does not have a friendly subscription model because it forces users to take a five-year subscription simultaneously, charging millions of dollars. Hence, our managers are looking for alternatives to AutoSys Workload Automation.
It would be helpful to be able to monitor and manage workload windows so we could minimize downstream applications. This would allow us easier access to the applications.
An area for improvement in AutoSys Workload Automation is that it lacks advanced features or advanced built-in functionalities found in competitors, for example, an advanced workflow feature. Even the handling or notification from AutoSys Workload Automation isn't the best in the industry. Other products have very good workflow-related functionalities such as ActiveBatch that's missing in AutoSys Workload Automation, so I wish the tool had those features.
AutoSys Workload Automation could improve the integration.
There should be easier migrations from a different bus scheduler. Prior to this workload, we were using BMC control M and the migration was really hard. We had to manually create the jobs and there was no sort of automation for the migration. Workload Automation could improve the handling of file transfer jobs. Compared to control M, control M allows multiple file transfers. It can have five types of files that can be transferred. They have different file formats or different sizes. You can configure it in control M. Here, you only have one and three for file transfer. A lot of times you also encounter issues with SSL crypto in conflict on certain jobs. Basically, the newer servers have newer security measures and currently, the product is not compatible with them.
AutoSys Workload Automation could improve in the Linux environment. The previous versions of the AutoSys Workload Automation let you take the profile of the user that you were using to run the tasks that you're going to automate, but in the latest versions, you can't do that, you need to make more definitions and it's a little bit difficult. It was easier in the previous versions. In an upcoming release, AutoSys Workload Automation could include more integrations capabilities. I have seen other tools that have native integrations with other tools, such as Docker and other services in the cloud. They are not taking this into account in AutoSys Workload Automation.
We are trying to see if we can use this from a cloud perspective with AWS, Azure, and other clouds, but it seems that there is no cloud integration in this product. We would like to see cloud integration. We are very pleased with this solution, but we are moving our application to the cloud, and we found out that it doesn't support any cloud features. So, we are trying to find a replacement.
If you do not need the latest features like cloud and compare, I would really advise using AutoSys. For future technologies, I cannot answer the question yet. In terms of what should be in the next release, I want integration and AI and so on. I'd like easy reporting where you can compare information, for example, "that job normally takes three minutes and last time it took six minutes or 10 minutes." Then you can get the information to the engineer of which job is taking more time than normal - understanding strange behavior compared to the baseline.
The solution could improve by having support for container environments.
The graphical interface can be improved.
Support definitely needs improvement. It's possible they're in some kind of transition so I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt but it's an issue. The pricing is definitely something they should look at, it's quite expensive. Finally, the latest features like the quick searching or better reporting and analysis of the jobs which are running in, needs to be improved. It's a great product but with the latest feature set there is a large scope for improvement. From a manageability point of view, the easy upgrade should be included and the frequent feature update too. Reporting and notifications need to be improved too, these are important things.
* It needs improvement in the high-availability side. * It needs improvement in WCC console and EEM console to make it user-friendly.
The installation process is complex, and is pretty archaic. The people who developed this had very little concern with GUI interface and it is all command line. Everything is K-space, and if you misspell a task by uppercase, lower case, etc. you just completely think that the task is different.
Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated. It lacks support and integration with cloud computing platforms.
We see improvement possibilities in the processing provision of predefined evaluations or individual objects, or in the Self Service portal, which can be used by any user to monitor objects or start objects.
Despite the commitment of the development team to improve the UI since version 11.3, the WCC module still lacks true quality. There are still too many screens and the use cases need to be handled in a more "compact" way. I have not seen the v12 product yet. Note that this product is now a legacy product with a dwindling user base and support. Do not consider for a green site implementation