Share your experience using OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence

PubSub+ Platform is primarily used for guaranteed delivery of messages from across systems, for microservice-based development, and for high-speed data consumption purposes. Guaranteed transmission of messages is another key use case.

The unique functions I appreciate about PubSub+ Platform are that it allows me to design my solution in a graphical manner, which is not available in many other products, and the design can also be pushed to the actual infrastructure layer, making it quite advantageous.

Mesh technology is useful in scenarios where different geographies have to be connected, although such situations are not commonly found. It is beneficial but not a super-used feature of PubSub+ Platform.

The event replay function is quite mature in PubSub+ Platform, allowing me to replay messages that are days in the past, which is a good feature.

The main benefits PubSub+ Platform provides for the end-user include building a robust and scalable system with very low network latency, which improves the customer experience, whether using mobile phones or applications. This type of messaging framework is extremely important, and Solace is a very good product in that space. Nowadays, most applications are built using microservices technology, with small microservices interchanging messages via PubSub+ Platform. Without it, realizing a scalable system would not be possible; for example, one cannot have Netflix or similar services that require quick data transit and a good user experience, ensuring that data cannot be lost in transit.

The analytics part of PubSub+ Platform is quite useful as it can connect with many analytical software tools, mainly for analysis of system logs, such as Splunk, DataDog, or Prometheus. It has the flexibility to connect with any of these and supports OpenTelemetry, which is not available in many other products, making traceability very easy. I can see how a message travels from a source system to the target system, end-to-end, along with what happens to that message along the path, making the analytics quite good.

Potential areas for improvement in PubSub+ Platform are its authentication mechanisms, which could be slightly better. While simple authentication using basic methods is easy, moving to more robust mechanisms like certificates or OAuth requires a bit deeper technical expertise.

I feel there is a lack of functionality in PubSub+ Platform; Solace has introduced microservices and micro-integrations recently with some capabilities, but they can improve on these. They also have some AI agent capabilities that are quite unknown, so if they can disclose this information properly, perhaps through blogs or detailed descriptions, it could be better.

I have been working with PubSub+ Platform for about five years.

I would rate the stability of PubSub+ Platform as a nine.

In terms of scalability, I would rate PubSub+ Platform as quite scalable, around 9.99.

I rate Solace's technical support as good; they can come on calls and assist quite well, so I could give them an eight.

The initial setup for PubSub+ Platform is not that difficult; it depends on the environment where I want to use it. If I use it on the cloud, it is quite straightforward, but in a Kubernetes environment, it needs a little bit of support.

Pricing-wise for PubSub+ Platform, I find it a little expensive, so I would rate it at six.

The main competitors in the market for PubSub+ Platform are IBM MQ and Kafka, with Kafka being the primary competitor.

If I compare the three solutions, I believe PubSub+ Platform provides a clear advantage for me because I can design my solution easily, which helps in building on an interface level.

Regarding security and compliance features, I have not explored that area much; it is not a compliance-oriented product, so I do not see any relevance of compliance concerning GDPR or similar regulations. I would rate this review an 8.5 overall.

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.