We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and Fortra's JAMS based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AppWorx Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ease of use and consistent performance. Fortra's JAMS stands out for its ability to track job dependencies, automate tasks, and provide extensive monitoring and control functions.
AppWorx Workload Automation has the potential to enhance its API integration and scalability. Fortra's JAMS requires improvements in various areas such as client interface, search capability, training resources, exception handling, browser version, custom execution methods, reporting, and documentation.
Service and Support: Customers have rated the technical support of AppWorx Workload Automation highly, while Fortra's JAMS has a responsive and knowledgeable support team.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for AppWorx Workload Automation may seem complex to those unfamiliar with the system, however, it is generally considered relatively easy and straightforward. It requires several months to complete and the involvement of an administrator with access. Fortra's JAMS has a straightforward and easy setup process. Users found it quick, simple, and intuitive, with some mentioning that it did not require formal training.
Pricing: AppWorx Workload Automation has a costly setup determined by the number of systems used, while Fortra's JAMS has a fair and reasonable pricing structure with an initial cost in the first year and an annual maintenance cost. Users consider JAMS to be affordable and a worthwhile investment.
ROI: Users have found that Fortra's JAMS delivers a considerable return on investment, resulting in time savings, enhanced productivity, and cost-effectiveness. It instills confidence in its ability to generate positive ROI. No ROI information was mentioned for AppWorx.
Comparison Results: Fortra's JAMS is highly favored over AppWorx Workload Automation. Users appreciate JAMS' ability to handle job dependencies, its automation capabilities, and the valuable features it provides, such as File Watchers and warnings for job issues. Users also find JAMS' pricing to be fair and reasonable compared to other solutions, resulting in a significant return on investment.
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"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."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"It is really a robust product."
"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."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"I like how you can add new execution methods on the fly. It isn't overly complex to add Python script support to an execution method in the JAMS system. The scheduling is excellent. You can schedule a maintenance window and take that resource unit out of everything. It halts all of the jobs."
"It has definitely drastically improved our capabilities to scale our automation. Before JAMS, there were a lot of manual processes. We had a couple of operators who spent all day doing that. A lot of the time with human intervention and human processes, it is as good as the person who may be following a procedure and human error is a big problem."
"The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful."
"Our company is based on data. Everything we do is data-driven, so it has been very valuable having one place where we can process all of the data and do batch schedules with chunks of data."
"The scheduling and execution of jobs are the most valuable features. The scheduling is important because if there is a task we want to execute at 4:00 AM, there's no way we will have someone who can manually run the job. In addition, we execute 100 to 200 jobs per day, and manual intervention is not an option."
"The code-driven automation for more complex scheduling requirements frees up time because it's really easy to use... It's almost like a stand-alone software that we can't live without."
"One of the things I like the most, as a SQL DBA, is the fact that we can manipulate tables in the background. Also, the fact that you can have your own views and work with the product the way it fits best is a very helpful feature."
"I find the historical tracking feature of JAMS invaluable for reviewing past events."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
"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."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"The scalability could improve."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"I would like to see the ability to interface with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, but they're still in the research phase. They need to ensure everything's legit and safe. The report designer and dashboards could also be improved. We're running 7.3, so I don't know if they have updated the reporting in 7.5, but I think the reports and dashboards could be better."
"The UI could be better. There were some things that were not quite intuitive, such as the search tool. When we tried to search for jobs, we had to clear the entire search and then go in and enter the new search query. That's something that wasn't intuitive for a new user."
"The biggest area with room for improvement is the area that my organization benefits the most from using JAMS, and that is in custom execution methods. I happen to have a very good C# developer. Ever since we got JAMS, he has spent a lot of time talking to JAMS developers, researching the JAMS libraries, and creating custom execution methods. He's gotten very good at it. He is now able to create them and maintain them very easily, but that knowledge was hard-won knowledge. It was difficult to come by, and if I should ever lose this developer, then I would be hard-pressed to find anyone who could create JAMS custom execution methods quite as well as he can since there really isn't all that much help, such as documentation or information, available on how to create custom execution methods."
"The client is horrible. Every time JAMS puts out a survey on what they can improve, I always say, "The client: When you are setting up jobs, it is quite horrible." The response has been, "Well, we are just using the Windows foundation," and I am like, "Why isn't it only your product?" We can get around it now that we know its quirks, but it is not the most user-friendly of tools out there. The UI is completely unintuitive. We had to go and open up a support ticket with JAMS just to get something back. It is not user-friendly at all."
"Fortra is getting much better with documentation and examples, but there is still room for improvement."
"If there were a softcover book on how to really take advantage of all of JAMS' tools, I would buy it. I do better with training books than online searching, so a book would be helpful."
"The product does not allow the users to cut and paste the job names from the screen."
"JAMS handles exceptions fairly well but there are some areas where it might improve a little bit. It has to do with being able to automatically handle exceptions, out-of-the-box, rather than having to code them."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while Fortra's JAMS is ranked 5th in Workload Automation with 27 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while Fortra's JAMS is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortra's JAMS writes "We can scale up our organization's scheduling and automation without having to add staff to the department". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Automic Workload Automation, Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch, whereas Fortra's JAMS is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and VisualCron. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. Fortra's JAMS report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
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.
