Automic Automation Reviews

This solution has many use cases because it's automation, so the sky is the limit. It can be useful for any workloads—DD operation, disaster recovery, data center automation—required by the customer. 

This solution is deployed on-prem. 

The most valuable features are its robustness, it's highly scalable, and it's easy to implement. 

This solution's out-of-box automation sets could be improved. They could be industry standardized out-of-box, or even runbook automation processes could be useful—just some plug-and-play automation processes out-of-box. It has many integration capabilities, from APIs to databases, but if the customer sees some out-of-box automation processes in it, it could be useful. 

As for additional features, a best practices library could be good. Also, maybe more technology connectors, in order to connect and run the automation, so more out-of-box integration points. 

We have been dealing with Automic for around three years. 

This solution is highly scalable. In our country, we have more than 30 customers using this solution. 

I would rate support an eight out of ten. From a customization point of view, it requires some technical knowledge. 

The installation is very straightforward. The time it will take depends on the implementation and the size of the project—it can range from one day to five days. A team of one to three people could be enough for deployment. 

We implement this solution for clients. 

They have changed the pricing on their licensing, and it's cheaper than before. 

I rate Automic Workload Automation a nine out of ten. I recommend this solution to others. 

We use it to automate our business.

While we have had some issues, it is mostly perfect. If it is set up, it is running.

It does its job.

Token-based authentication: Where we do not have to use a password, and can use tokens for authentication in other systems.

Apart from the new UI, it is very stable. The new UI feels unready. It makes your browsers crash.

The scalability is very good. We can scale it however we want. We have seen new add-ons, such as the event machine. There is always something to augment.

You have to improve your systems, but there are no seen limits. 

Sometimes, it is a bit hard get through the first level of support to the second level, then to the endpoint of the solution. Overall, it is a bit tricky.

Our migration from a previous system was not easy. However, when we did a new implementation that was easy.

I do not remember.

I recommend to try the product. Our competitors mostly use this product too.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: Getting things done better.

We are using mainly Workload Automation for all types of jobs over different servers and operating systems.

Without automation, it would be nearly impossible to do all the jobs that we are doing.

It is flexible. We can do additional scripting in Automic script, in combination with JSL language.

Documentation is not great. It was previously much better.

I would like to see features from "Prompt" sets in read Masks.

At the moment, we are using 2.0. The job automation is okay. The main functions are stable. There are bugs though.

It is scalable.

We used just shell scripts and crontab.

The initial setup was straightforward.

In some of our departments, it has had a great impact on efficiency, costs, and resources.

I would recommend Workload Automation.

We use Workload Automation to control all our processes and the batch control.

We are working with version 10, and need to upgrade to version 12.2.

• The product is clear and very visual. 
  
• We receive feedback right at the moment that we need it. 
• We are able to control and change our processes when necessary.

At the moment, we have clear batches to see workflows to control.

In the next version, I do not know what is coming up for us.

The workflows should be clearer and more expressive. I need this going forward.

We have downtime during every upgrade. In the normal process, it works fine. 

It is scalable.

We are now in extended support. We are now in the change process, so we needed extended support.

When we contact support, we can get through to the right person to receive the correct answers.

The product has helped save, time, money, and resources. It has given us a competitive advantage in our industry. 

Use the product. Support is good and it works fine.

Our customers use it for scheduling.

It performs quite well. It depends on the customer. Some customers do not use it with all the features that the product offers. They only use a small set of what the product can do.

Reliability: You can count on it.

It has saved my customers time, money, resources, and efficiency.

Monitoring is very good.

For power users, it does not work well for them at the moment.

The event monitoring is very good. It has become a great part of the product suite. However, most customers rarely use it.

At the moment, it is working quite well. Version nine's stability was not good. Now, it is stable again.

The scalability is very good.

Mostly, we get a standard answer. Sometimes, the support is not very good.

Maybe it is problem with some customers and the tickets that they are opening, as the tickets are not very well designed. Still, as an experienced user, when I open a ticket, I put in all the needed information. Yet, the support for me is still not great and could be better.

It is straightforward for me. Those new to this business find the initial setup complex. 

It is a complex product, so you can't do the setup with a click.

It is a good product for solution automation.

Our primary use case is release automation. 

We did a PoC last month, and are planning on probably implementing the product.

We have seen a cost improvement from it.

It is a way to test the system from production, which is nice.

It is very difficult to migrate. We want to buy one package. The release automation should be in one package.

It is a stable product. 

It is a scalable product. It is a very strong instrument for job scaling.

The technical support has been good with quick responses. Their last response was for the product license. It was delivered within two days.

We were not previously using another solution.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

We did not evaluate anyone else.

It is a nice product. We have been looking for this type of product for many years. 

We are a reseller and solution provider, and this is one of the products that we provide for our customers.

This is a conversion product, and we use this solution to assist customers who are converting from another product. Our primary focus is one-for-one migration, bringing it up to the next level and getting it ready for the next phase.

This solution saves our organization time, in terms of management. It is also more systematic and gives us more control. It is easy to learn.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler.

The workflow is object-oriented.

The source code is centralized, rather than being deployed to the individual servers.

There are always ways that technical support can be improved.

I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution.

In terms of stability, so far so good. We have not encountered any bugs in this solution.

Our proposal matches the average, so we have not needed the solution to grow.

The plan is to increase usage once this solution is stabilized. We are hoping that this is in the near future.

I have worked with technical support, and we are pretty happy with them. The response time is long, but they have been ok so far.

Prior to this, we used other products from the CA Automation family, but with different branding. We used the AutoSys d-Series Edition.

With respect to migration or conversion projects, the compilation is done with a conversion factory. This is done on-site, and after that, there is testing and production. The deployment time for a project is between three and six months.

Many of the things are handled by the CA Compilation team. We are on-site, assisting the technical team. We migrate across from the remote site to the client site.

There is a lot of coordination that has to be done with the customer. The environment, including the data, has to be ready.

Two or three people are required, on-site, for the deployment. One of them is an architect and two of them are engineers.

Once this solution is deployed, the customer takes over the operation, including the maintenance.

When our customers have a lot of manual processes, the automation will reduce the number of human errors that occur. This will reduce the cost.

I began using this product just after it was acquired by CA. We have four to five people who have been trained on CA Workload Automation across all of the developing nations.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to carefully look at the environment. Some manual processes can be converted, but some are best left done using human manual input. If this is the case then you have to convert these into a scripted document image.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.