Automic Automation Reviews

You gain a lot of time and effort because you can automatize many things. Repetitive tasks costs us, so we can reduce them to zero effort and minimal costs by using the product.

The most valuable parts are the scalability and flexibility, where you can do whatever you think, then you can realize it in the product and have many ways to do it. So, there is not one road you can take, but many roads.

There is one missing part in the product concerning recurring tasks. You can schedule a recurring task by a context action, and run it as recurrent, but it creates a time container which can be quit and disappears. So, it doesn't remain in the system. I would like there to be some time container objects which exist and remain in objects which you can also handle and add. For example, inside the schedule to be able to schedule recurring tasks.

This is a very stable product. When it comes to a new release, you sometimes have to be a bit more careful. For the rest, it is very stable. Over the years, it has also become more stable.

It is very scalable. You can use it for a small or big company, so it works in both cases, and also with little or big development teams.

The technical support is very available and competent. They have a lot of know-how, which they are willing to share. If you have big issues, they will quickly help you.

In the beginning, we used a banking solution which was running on one platform. It was AS/400 at the time. We were changing the banking platform so it moved to a new platform. The old scheduler did not exist for the new platform. 

Additionally, the new banking solution needed an adapter, so we also needed a solution which could interact with this banking solution. We had more satellite systems, so we also had to handle the planning between different systems and the old scheduler, which was one platform based and it could not handle it. That was the initiative to choose a new scheduler.

Implementing the solution in 2009, the setup was easy (straightforward).

Other parts, meaning implementation of all the processes, this was very complex. We had to think about steps, like name conventions, standards to introduce, common objects the users should use, and the training that users should receive about how to use the product.

I would rate it as a nine out of 10, not the best one. It gets a minus one because of the new web interface, because it is not so easy to handle nor is it intuitive to use like the old one. As for the rest, you can do everything you want. It is scalable, flexible, and it does what you want it to do.

One key point for our selling is our business's dashboarding. It was something very important and we used it at the beginning very much. 

It is an easy product to use, and we can use it for end-to-end process automation. We also have the capabilities to do dashboarding, therefore we have an analytics product that can provide other things and value for us.

We would like to see more dashboarding into the product, maybe an embedded Java API which we would be able to load on our own objects into the system. We were writing them on our own, but we would like this standardized.

The system is a stable product overall. We did something maybe a little bit wrong at the beginning, so we had a little bit of an unstable product. Since we have merged to version 12, it has become a stable system.

It is a very scalable product, not only for Workload Automation, but also for the other products provided by Automic or CA Automic. You can use the baseline, the automation engine, and scale up what you need.

Technical support is excellent from our past experiences with Automic. At the moment, we are facing a few issues with the merge of CA and Automic. We hope these will be resolved soon.

Our old solution was not able to deliver a real end-to-end automation. It was embedded in SAP. An excellent product for SAP so far, but it is not able to be scalable for the end-to-end. 

This was the reason why we did research at our company to do an end-to-end product assessment. In the end, the decision was to made to go with Automic.

During our PoC, I was the guy who was implementing and installing the product. I thought with the help of a consultant that it was an easy installation. 

On the shortlist, when we purchased the product, we had CA, Stonebranch, BMC Control-M, Automic, and our current vendor in mind. A few of them were kicked out during the first session because they were not able to deliver everything. In the end, we had BMC and Automic.

I would like to rate it as an eight out of 10, because there is room for improvement, and I would like to see this from Automic. They should continue to work on the product to improve the product.

If my peers are looking for a real end-to-end solution, not only some siloed solution, they should go for Automic because it is an easy product to use. It is easy to install. I can recommend this product to other customers.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: The partnership between a vendor and customer is very important. You should have a good account manager in place who is dealing with the customer. This is something very important for us. Customer service and support are also important. 

One of the uses that we decided to use it for is site switching. We have two data centers, and we have critical applications in both data centers. We site switch them twice a year just to make sure the DR is in place. It takes just an hour to move one system from A to B. It is so fast, quick, and effective.

The two main things about it are its versatility and stability. For versatility, we bought it to do one job, and we now use it now for several jobs on all different types of applications. In regards to its stability, it is very reliable. We have never had any unplanned crashes. 

The new user interface AWI could improve. It is quite easy to use and work around, but it has lost some of the functionality that we used to have in our Vim client user interface.

I have been working on it for about 12 years now. We have had three unplanned outages throughout the whole time, and all three were man-made errors (someone pulling the plug out).

With some of the newer features, we have been able to do new things with them. We are always in demand in our company, someone asking us, "Can you do this or can you do that?"

The technical support is very good. It can sometimes take a little long to get an initial response, but it is very good. They will persevere, and get to the bottom of whatever the issue is.

We bought this back in 2004. We were upgrading all of our systems to SAP systems, and we wanted a scheduler. We did not want to use the SAP scheduler, so we were recommended UC4 (as it was at the time). That is why we brought it in. It was for our SAP system, but we use it on all applications now.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. There is an awful lot of planning because it is such a critical application for us. We have to test everything before we go ahead. It could take us up to three months doing all of the testing, maybe putting the infrastructure in place for an upgrade. The actual day when we upgrade only takes about an hour or so. It is very fast, and we have never had an issues.

Because of its stability and versatility, I give it a nine out of 10. I never give tens.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: Support is very important. Also, if we are looking for a solution, we might go to Automic, and say, "We want to do this. Can you help?" They are always very good. They will come over, sit down, and talk with us, helping us where they can.

We are using Automic in a wide range of operations in our production site and our disaster recovery site. In addition, we are using it in our production site as an ITSM integration tool.

I am using Automic Workload Automation for disaster recovery, and its monitoring capabilities and its scalability for our operations. It is very good.

The SSH agent is missing in version 12.1. Maybe it would be a good addition to see on the web client of the next version of Atomic.

We have been using Automic for two and a half years. It is very rare to have a problem. If we have databases working well, Automic has never let us down.

It is very scalable. We use it in every aspect of our IT operations, and the scalability is very good.

Turkey was our technical support during the project phase. They always help us to grow our jobs, automate new things, and when a new version comes they quickly adopt to the product.

We were not previously using another product. However, we did have our own automation solution (scripting). Before Automic, there was no automation product.

In the beginning, it is hard. We did not know how to deal with things. However, when the process is ongoing, it is very easy to set up and build infrastructure on Automic.

I will give it an eight out of 10, because no product is as good as a 10. There is room for improvement for Automic, but I am pleased to use it.

Right now, we are working with version 10 of the product, it is very good. We are very happy with it. However, we have to upgrade to a different version and there are a lot of things that are different, and we are not completely convinced how it will work. 

Our normal functions, what we had in version 10, are lost or not there. So, we will have to see how it will work in the future. As a company and as a product, though, we are ready to upgrade.

It is a batch application. We have a daily batch that we have to start. This application controls the batching. So, this application is essential to our company.

We have a lot of places in Germany. For example, if there was someone in Munich who wants to send data to someone in Hamburg, it is very easy to do a production application safely and quickly, because we have everything in one system. We just do a file transfer. 

It depends for me as an administrator. There are a lot of features which help us get a stable application. It is easy to have a stable production line, because this app supports us very well.

I hope in the next release that they will solve all the bugs which they have found in development. 

I hope going forward they will make some changes to the documentation. I hope they will write into the documentation what has changed and what the new names are. For example, some features have a new name. I hope they will make a translation the names in the old version to the names in the newer version. This would be a very important thing.

Version 10 is very stable. We have no problems with the product. 

Some problems could happen in the future because the current version does not seem to be stable. There are a lot of things which could bring danger into the stability of our work process, because things have been changed, and it is not possible to work the product in the same way. We have to accept the changes, and we are not sure if our employees will be able to accept the changes in such a short time frame and perform them the way they should.

There are so many possibilities to be used from this product, and every company is using it in their own very special way. Though, I don't think every company is using it 100 percent for all of its possibilities. There are a lot of areas that you can go with it.

When I came to the company, they were already using Automic. They had been using it for a long time.

The complexity of the initial setup depends on the person who is performing it. It was okay for me, but I have some colleagues who have had some problems with it.

We have increased efficiency with this application.

I prefer this product.

Primary use case is to automate our SAP job workflows and all the job workflows that we work with. Thus, to get better performance in our company by automating everything that we are working on. So far, it has been working well.

It is easy to learn, but hard to master. If you have been working for years with this product, it is easy to understand the whole product and work with the needs that we have. Therefore, it offers a lot of things that we require. So, it is really good.

Automic is perfect to work with for a lot of job loads. It is perfectly done to combine the needs that we need. Therefore, it is a good solution for our requirements.

We are able to combine job scripting on the server and automation engine on the GUI. Therefore, we are capable to work in SAP and on the servers, then file transfer the whole product line, which Automic offers.

Some of the usual features are now not there, for example: For calendar details, in versions before, you could see it because it was a different color or different letter. Now, it is all similar icons, and some features are marking more objects than just one, which is making it not possible to see anymore. There are some features which were basic and are now gone. I heard that they are coming back. So, I hope it will get better.

I would like the transport case to be in a new feature. This way, you can stage objects to be more flexible and with easy automation. Right now, it is not that easy to transport some things automatically. Thus, it would be nice if these were some of the features which will be offered as part of the critical path which is coming. It would be nice to set our own critical paths, so these workflows can be critical because there are some important workflows running. This is critical for us, but it would also be nice.

Right now, it is decent. The new version is sort of a downgrade because some features that we need are gone. The version before was more stable than the current one because we are having some problems with the performance. Therefore, I hope the next version(s) will be better again. However, right now, it is not as good as it used to be.

Scalability is good for us. We are growing, so this is perfect for us. It is easy to scale. So, it is good.

We work with a partner who offers technical support.

If the company is big, use Automic because you are able to automate things more easily. 

If the company is smaller, use Control-M. The understanding of it is easier than Automic, because it offers more. So, if you are smaller and don't need such overload, use something else, like Control-M.

The version before was overloaded because if opened various windows, it was not easy to understand if you were new to the product. The newest version is easier to understand. However, right now, the performance is not as good as it used to be and some features are gone. There are still improvements needed. It is decent, and there are good ideas, but there are still improvements needed. 

We use Automic Workload Automation (AWA) for different things in the company, e.g., batch-bookings, archiving, virus scans, flight plans, etc. It is used for everything in the travel business which has IT. We do a lot of batch things within the industry, as it is a wide field.

The company does not notice our team much, which is not so good. However, that is because we can are quick and solve problems before they happen. We monitor and see where problems might occur, so we are not noticed so much in the company, but it helps in avoiding problems.

The automation helps a company to do things without manual processes. This is the definition: Without having to do so many things manually. 

One example that we have with a new customer is that they hosted their programs and everything themselves. The developers received calls almost every second night saying, “We have a problem,” without having on-call duty, but they did not have any on-call duty. Yet, they still received calls saying, “There's a problem.” They just had to rerun something, and it worked. Yet, every second night, they got called. 

With the automated solution they are now happy, because we can easily say, “If it breaks down, it might be a networking problem. Just restart three times and after about five minutes, run it, and it will be okay." Nobody gets called and everything works. The solution is easy for them now. For us, it is a small thing. It helps a lot, not only in huge business problems, but with the smaller ones. We have a much better night sleep and can develop their stuff better.

You can create very fine, granular workflows with a lot of possibilities. It gives you the possibility to do things in many ways. We do not have so many cases where you just can copy information here and there. Our customers have special needs, and we can use the tool to do that.

I am heading up the AWI. I desperately miss the possibility to show my read-only users on the Explorer side only their folders, not all the folders. This is something I would like to have on the dashboards (for example), where I can show them from an assembly side just their folders, not all the folders. They should have only rights to their folders, so why are they able to see all the other folders? It is confusing for them and not very comfortable. I told this to the developers already.

It is quite stable. I have been with the company for a year and a half, and in that time, we have not had any major breakdowns. We do not have many issues with the stability at the moment. 

We are now testing on the new release and the AWI. We are a little skeptical about what is coming up, but we will wait and see.

I am a little new to the administration. At the moment, we are planning the new release where it will be easier to scale it to our needs. Though, I can't say anything about the actual version that we use at the moment.

I have raised several incidents. I have been quite content with how they have gotten back to me, which is good. Even with the transformation now to CA, I like the way they work.

The initial setup was very complex. This company and the one that I worked at before found the very first migration from whole systems, like TWS, to the Automic product challenging. They were not used to all the features that it had. Though, I did not hear a lot of complaints about it.

I would encourage people to use the solution.

We use it for the following:

• Automation
• Server positioning
• File transfer solutions
• Daily business processes
• Different processes.
  

• All the possibilities, like scripting different objects. 
• All the components that can be used to design workflows; process automation. 

There are some problems when using the new interface, which is normal, as it is a new technology. In the future, it will be much better. Hopefully, Automic is working hard on the issue.

We would like to see critical path analyzers. I am not sure if it is coming. If it does, out-of-the-box would be nice. We would also like improved SLR monitoring. There are SLR objects, but I can't define an SLR object plus one, or end days. I can only do it for one day. As we are time shifting to another day, it is not possible. This should be improved.

The performance is nice. The stability is very good. We do not have any problems concerning the stability. We have never had any major problems. We have had minor problems, but it has not crashed hard. It runs our business safely.

We have one server, and it has enough hardware with no problems at all. 

In the last two years, the reaction times were not so good. However, in the last four to six months, my experience has with them has been a lot faster. People are called back five minutes after I establish a ticket or incident. They are often doing WebEx and web sessions to get to the point, not making us write 50 pages, then not providing a solution.

It was 13 years ago, we previously used Control-M and switched to UC4. This was a management decision.

I did it 13 years ago at different companies. In the past, we did not use the wizard. We set up the components standalone, then combined them in configuration. It was easy and well documented. 

Presently, there is a problem with the translation. It is some type of hybrid. We have some parts in German and some in English. It should be completely in German and completely in English. It should be better in the future.

We receive time efficiency from this product. For example, some users use to manually transfer many files from A to B, and we have automated this task. We used to have complex solutions just to gain information from files, read files, put in a customer filter, or share something. In the past, many people had to look into the files manually. 

No competitor has this mass possibilities to design processors for automation solutions.

Test it for a long time. You have to look if it fits into the mindset of your company.

Main criteria when selecting a vendor: 

We look to other companies about the following:

• What do they use? 
• How is their experience? 
• Does the support work? 
• How quick is the support? 
• How good is the documentation? 
• How good is the vendor concerning new technologies and time to market new solutions in the software?