The easiest route - we'll conduct a 15 minute phone interview and write up the review for you.
Use our online form to submit your review. It's quick and you can post anonymously.
I'm working in the BMC partner in Indonesia that sells and implements a couple of BMC solutions, including BMC Control-M, and then the monitoring part, as well as the asset management family. In my country, we are approaching several customers to install AIOps, as Indonesia is not as advanced compared to America or Europe, meaning we are about five years behind, but there's keen interest from existing customers.
The first valuable feature I find in BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps is that you get the best ITSM tool, which should become the gateway. This means a good seamless connectivity or connection with other tools and modules in the AIOps.
BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps provides the best feature through its seamless connection from monitoring to Remedy ITSM, which is a famous ITSM tool in the world besides ServiceNow. The second feature involves BMC acting as a Manager of Manager, categorizing event notifications from existing monitoring systems according to severity levels.
To improve BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps, commercially, they likely need to remake the licensing model so that customers can choose what they need instead of a buffet-style package, and they are considered very expensive, especially in Indonesia.
I would like to see full AI implementation with their own AI engine in BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps, eliminating the need for external engines, allowing for deeper technical engagement with users.
BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps monitoring itself is about probably just a couple of years, five years I think, while the monitoring part is new. For the monitoring, they call it TSOM or TrueSight Operation Management, which is about probably five to seven years of age.
I would rate BMC technical support maybe an eight, because while they are helpful, their support typically comes from India and often has to escalate issues to more senior levels, resulting in delays.
Positive
BMC Helix's capability to provide a unified view across hybrid environments is pretty good because they are quite advanced in this area. They have two models, cloud and on-premise, which are quite mature and good in their field.
BMC is reasonably expensive because they are in the enterprise layer, offering high-quality solutions, but they are very powerful tools to be used. If customers are only looking for a single ITSM without leveraging the full AIOps solution, then it may not be worth it once they see how powerful these tools are.
Automation functionalities are definitely useful, especially for medium to big size companies, as I don't think they can do without it nowadays.
In terms of resource utilization, if a customer is going to implement automation, infrastructure is no longer an issue for them. They will need container-based solutions, and not just minimum specs but larger specifications.
Machine learning algorithms have indeed helped my customer's IT decision-making, acting as a worthwhile selling point for BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps and ensuring everything runs smoothly.
To measure the improvement provided by machine learning algorithms, it's essential that existing tools data is present for the AI to learn from. BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps will analyze behavior and perform statistical data analysis to make proposals to the user, but if the customer lacks historical data or doesn't engage with the tools, it becomes ineffective.
I would rate BMC Helix Operations Management with AIOps a seven and a half, factoring in both technical and non-technical aspects. I definitely expect additional features from them in the future.
We use the auto-purge transaction for some transactions that run very long, and we also use automation to open and close files in CICS as well.
I use OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence mostly for message triggering for alert and alarm, but that is a normal feature that automation systems should do. It works well in alerting, but that is the basic function of automation tools. Everyone in the market can do that, so I don't have much impression of the tool; it is just a normal tool, in my opinion.
My impressions on OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is that it's quite difficult to use, as it relies mainly on the coding syntax and doesn't provide an easy-to-use GUI. OPS_MVS should have an easy-to-use menu, as the way to create the script is quite difficult, and they should improve this.
I just joined the team about two years ago, but they have used OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence for quite some time, maybe five years.
My team built the customized automation scripts by ourselves, and sometimes we have vendors to help us also, but we never asked the CA team to help us.
For automation products, I used to use IBM System Automation a long time ago, and also MainView Automation, and Control-O. I prefer MainView the most, either MainView Automation or Control-O, as it is very easy to use, while I think IBM System Automation is quite similar to OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence because it relies heavily on the syntax and coding rather than the GUI.
OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is the automation tool I use. I think OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence is good for creating complex rules because it's coding, but it takes time to learn how to use it. OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence works well if you know the syntax very well and you have experience in creating scripts or REXX syntax; it would be very good and is a good tool, but it takes time to learn, so that is for experienced staff to work with. I would rate the product a six from one to ten. I cannot think of any additional features in the next release of OPS_MVS Automation Intelligence.
