BMC AMI DevX Reviews

BMC AMI DevX is best used for modernizing mainframe development and accelerating CI/CD pipelines by bringing legacy environments like COBOL and PL/I on IBM Z into modern IDEs such as VS Code and Eclipse. The platform replaces traditional green-screen interfaces with BMC AMI DevX Workbench for VS Code. Tools including Code Insights and generative AI map runtime dependencies, explain complex business logic, and break down monolithic COBOL programs. The solution is also used in automated testing and debugging.

Consider a nightly batch program written in COBOL that calculates interest updates but fails with a critical S0C7 data exception error. Traditionally, a developer would have to log into a green screen, navigate through ISPF panels, and read through massive IBM dump files to locate the error. With BMC AMI DevX, the modernized workflow uses VS Code, Git, and Code Insights to visualize the impact instead of guessing which programs interact with the broken batch job. When I open VS Code and use Code Insights, it generates a visual interactive topology map of the application. This visual chart reveals that the failing COBOL program relies on a specific DB2 database table and two subroutines, instantly narrowing down where the bad data originated. Line-by-line live debugging works by setting up a debug session directly inside VS Code using Code Debug, then launching the batch job in a test environment. Execution pauses automatically at the exact line of COBOL code that caused the crash.

Automated regression testing is also a valuable part of this solution. Before committing a code fix, developers need to ensure the change will not break other parts of the application. Total Test automatically intercepts the data passing through the program and generates a reusable test case, then runs this automated test inside Jenkins or GitHub Actions CI/CD pipelines. BMC AMI DevX has helped me develop COBOL applications effectively.

The positive impacts on my organization are significant across three critical areas: workforce transformation, delivery velocity, and system reliability. Productivity has increased by 33 percent when transitioning mainframe teams from green screens to a standard modern IDE, allowing our company's developers to focus heavily on value-adding code. Release time has also been reduced by removing manual deployment handoffs and utilizing automated CI/CD pipelines. Deployment frequency has increased by 50 percent, allowing the delivery pipeline to shift from sluggish quarterly releases to faster incremental software drops.

When an operational error occurs, visual analysis tools and immediate root cause diagnostics cut down the mean time to restore services (MTTR) dramatically. This faster recovery capability enables rapid service restoration. Workforce training has also become 50 percent faster. Additionally, there are approximately 35 percent fewer failed changes, as automated quality gates in the pipeline catch structural regressions early, reducing the rate of faulty code entering production.

The best features of BMC AMI DevX include the modern IDE extension Workbench, which integrates directly into Visual Studio Code and Eclipse. This replaces old green-screen ISPF panels with a modern tab interface. Governed CI/CD automation pipelines automate the mainframe software delivery pipeline and bridge traditional z/OS architecture with modern Git-style branching and Jenkins pipelines. Automated data stubbing and shifts automate complex unit and regression testing by isolating program changes through creating realistic data stubs.

Interactive visualization and deep diagnostics provide source-level interactive debugging for COBOL, PL/I, and Assembler. I can pause execution, review variables on hover, and analyze exact line faults instantly. The standout feature is AI-augmented application intelligence. BMC AMI's Code Insights with generative AI addresses the biggest risk in mainframe environments: the fear of changing poorly documented, monolithic legacy code. I can right-click any block of dense, decades-old COBOL code to get a plain English explanation of what the exact logic does. It creates visual maps showing how massive, undocumented program architectures interact with variables and DB2 databases at runtime.

The specific AI feature that stands out in BMC is its plain language capability. While many AI coding assistants excel at writing new code, BMC AMI addresses the most challenging problem in enterprise IT: understanding millions of lines of poorly documented, multi-decade-old mainframe code before making a change. The specific workflow moment where this AI application truly stands out is the right-click code explain functionality. When a junior developer starts with updating a 40-year-old billing application, they are often met with massive, complex code files. With the AI action inside VS Code or Eclipse, the developer can highlight a dense, archaic block of COBOL and right-click to choose "Code Explain." When I click right-click and select "Code Explain," it explains each and every line of the code in context. BMC AMI does not give a generic syntax definition but analyzes the context to output a plain English summary of the business logic. For example, if I right-click any code, it might explain: "This block validates user's zip codes against the active database and applies a 5 percent state tax if true." The developer can then instantly convert that AI explanation into permanent code comments with one click to log that tribal knowledge for future teams.

Governance and security are the most important aspects of this platform. BMC AMI DevX uses a mainframe-centric control plane architecture that allows developers to use open modern tools such as VS Code and Git while strictly maintaining authoritative lifecycle control, security rules, and compliance standards on the mainframe. The platform features mainframe-level security and access control, preserving the mainframe control plane with native SAF and ESM integration and supply chain security compliance. The platform includes built-in filters to intercept and block prompt injection attacks and abnormal input behaviors. A character-level allowlist prevents simple or rogue characters from ensuring sensitive data or phrasing is filtered out before it hits the large language model. The private cloud control feature allows organizations to anchor the AI assistant to local enterprise-hosted large language models. Proprietary source code and banking data are kept entirely within the company's secure cloud perimeter, away from public AI training data sets.

The integration aspect is very seamless and wonderful. Although I have used the platform primarily for COBOL, I have used it for different languages as well, and it has helped significantly. The right-click code explain feature explains the whole logic of the code, which helps me build, maintain, and understand the code better. The modernized COBOL code using AI-powered transformation is easy to understand when the code explanation feature reveals the whole code logic.

BMC AMI DevX can be improved primarily by streamlining initial configuration and installation, simplifying advanced documentation, and enhancing UI/UX feature discoverability. While the platform successfully bridges modern IDEs such as VS Code with z/OS, user feedback highlights the need for simplifying setup and onboarding configuration. The initial installation and login process can be simplified. Although it feels complex initially, once completed, there is nothing to do with installation repeatedly since it is a one-time process. However, it is still somewhat complex.

Basic tutorials are available that address teams implementing the configuration of multi-vendor tools and integration, but documentation gaps exist that frequently force heavy reliance on vendor support. Additionally, certain components across the workspace and diagnostic tools retain a legacy feel or hide powerful features behind deep menus, so UI/UX features can be simplified.

Integrating with non-BMC enterprise testing or new CI/CD orchestrators can require custom engineering rather than native plug-and-play connectors. Optimizing large-scale performance is also important, as heavy resource consumption during deep runtime analysis for large-scale code mapping can impact performance over slower network connections for extremely dense application modules.

I have been using BMC AMI DevX for two to three years, and it is quite the best platform to use.

BMC AMI DevX is stable.

It is highly scalable, and I think it is quite the best software currently available.

Customer support is also great. They are available most of the time to understand the situation and condition. If I am facing any issue, they are always there to help me out. I would rate customer service as a 10 out of 10.

My organization did not use any different solution previously.

Fewer employees are needed for the same work that previously required more staff. The faster service recovery and accelerated deployment cycle have enabled more efficient operations. The workforce we utilized was less than what we would have needed with our previous approach.

The software was provided by my organization, so I am not aware of the pricing, setup cost, and licensing details. I have used and worked with it as a developer, but I am not the administrator who purchased it.

I did not evaluate any other options.

I would rate BMC AMI DevX 9 out of 10 based on its overall usage. As I have already mentioned the improvement areas, that is the reason I reduced the rating slightly. Otherwise, it works fabulously, and I think everyone should adopt it. The process of initial installation and complex initial configurations is the main reason for the slightly lower rating. Aside from those areas, it is perfect, which is the reason I am giving it a 9 rather than a 10.

In my organization, I deployed BMC AMI DevX using a hybrid cloud architecture. It interfaces directly with a physical or virtual mainframe and splits its footprint between on-premises infrastructure and public or private cloud. AWS and Azure were used for this deployment.

The advice I would give is to ensure functional pairs understand the complex logic and databases. It will help teams upskill each other using BMC AMI DevX as the common language and platform to streamline development. I would recommend building and distributing pre-configured workspace profiles to get new developers up and running in minutes. Code mapping and debugging consume mainframe resources, so work closely with your system administrator to maximize efficiency. My overall review rating is 9 out of 10.

BMC AMI DevX is used primarily for mainframe application development and troubleshooting, particularly for COBOL and JCL. I use it to edit and navigate code, browse datasets, and submit jobs, and also to debug application issues.

One example is when a COBOL batch job fails with a SOC7 data exception. I first check the job output and abend details to identify the calling program and statement. Then I use BMC AMI DevX to step through the COBOL program and check the variable values at the point of failure and trace the program flow. This helps me determine whether invalid numeric data or a specific piece of program logic caused the issue. Once I identify the root cause, I make the required changes, test them, and then follow the normal change and deployment process.

BMC AMI DevX has had a positive impact mainly by improving developer productivity and making mainframe development more accessible. The modern development environment reduces the need to switch between multiple tools for activities such as editing COBOL, browsing datasets, submitting jobs, and debugging. It also helps with newer development work where we work with legacy applications, as experienced developers transition away from traditional green screen workflows. Overall, it has made development and troubleshooting more efficient and provides a more modern way of working with existing mainframe applications.

The clearest measurable impact is faster troubleshooting and faster debugging. For issues where BMC AMI DevX is applicable, the debugging time has been reduced by 20 to 30% mainly because I can step through the COBOL program and check variable values. It has reduced manual effort by bringing code analysis and debugging into a more interactive experience.

The most valuable feature is the integrated COBOL debugging and code analysis capability. Being able to step through programs, set breakpoints, and monitor variable values to understand how the program flow operates makes troubleshooting much easier and more structured. I also appreciate the modern development environment for editing COBOL, browsing datasets, and submitting JCL jobs without constantly switching between different tools. The code navigation and AI-assisted code understanding capabilities are also useful for working with unfamiliar legacy applications.

The code understanding features have been useful when I need to work with unfamiliar COBOL applications. They help me explain existing code, identify the relationships and dependencies between programs and copybooks, and make it easier to understand the overall program flow. Instead of manually tracking every section of a large legacy application, I can use the AI assistance to get a quicker understanding of what the code is doing and where a change may have an impact. This reduces the time to get familiar with older code and makes maintenance and troubleshooting more straightforward and efficient.

I would suggest making the initial installation and configuration simpler, especially for new users. The login and startup experience could also be improved by reducing repeated login prompts and the time it takes for the application to become ready. I would like better integration between debugging and related information such as JCL, job output, abend details, and application logs. A more intuitive interface, stronger documentation website, and an easier onboarding process would also be beneficial. Additionally, enhanced AI-assisted capabilities would make the product easier to adopt.

I have been using BMC AMI DevX for about one year.

BMC AMI DevX feels stable in my experience.

BMC AMI DevX is good in terms of scalability. From my experience, it has been scalable for our mainframe development and support needs, handling large COBOL programs and large workloads.

The customer support is responsive when issues are raised and takes technical cases seriously. In our environment, some requests are routed through our internal support or mainframe team rather than directly to BMC, but issues are still handled through appropriate channels. I have a positive impression of the support experience. I would rate the customer support 9 out of 10.

We did not use any other solution before this. We were using mainframe tools before BMC AMI DevX.

For issues where BMC AMI DevX is applicable, I have seen debugging time decrease by around 20 to 30% because I can trace the COBOL programs and also inspect the variables. We can also identify the failing statement more efficiently, so the debugging time has been reduced by 20 to 30%.

I do not have direct information about the setup cost and pricing and licensing. From the implementation perspective, I think the initial configuration can require some effort to align the product with existing enterprise processes and mainframe tooling.

We did not see many options, but we primarily relied on standard mainframe tools such as ISPF and SDSF, and we used to do manual tracking of COBOL.

BMC AMI DevX provides a strong modern development and debugging experience for mainframe applications. I rate it in the range of 8 to 9 out of 10. What keeps it from being a 10 is mainly user experience, as the login and startup process can be frustrating, and the initial setup can also be challenging for new users.

I have a positive view of the security around BMC AMI DevX in an enterprise environment. However, I have not personally evaluated the underlying governance controls of its AI capabilities in detail. For AI-assisted code understanding, I want clear controls around access to source code and link data and permissions, as well as understanding how AI-generated explanations are processed. These areas would be important considerations before using the AI features with sensitive or business-critical mainframe code.

I find that the AI-assisted code understanding and output generated through BMC AMI DevX is useful and generally reliable for getting an initial understanding of unfamiliar COBOL applications. It can explain code, identify dependencies, and clarify program flow, which saves time when working through legacy code. However, I treat AI output as a starting point rather than the final authority, especially for business-critical logic, and I still validate the explanation against actual code and application behaviors before making any changes.

BMC AMI DevX is deployed in a hybrid cloud in our organization and integrates with our existing mainframe environment. IBM is the cloud provider for our hybrid cloud deployment.

My advice would be to evaluate BMC AMI DevX against the specific needs of your mainframe development team. If you work extensively with COBOL and want to modernize development, debugging, and DevOps workflows, it is worth considering. I would recommend running a full proof of concept with your applications and involving both experienced and newer developers. Pay particular attention to integration with existing source control, CI/CD, and security processes. Also, plan for some initial configuration and provide hands-on training so the team can get comfortable with the platform. My overall rating for BMC AMI DevX is 8 out of 10.

I work on mainframe, and some of the developers prefer to code on BMC AMI DevX because it looks more modern. For me, my basic use of it is just to extract information. Most of the time we end up having to extract certain files from the mainframe. Because those files use copybooks, the only way to extract the file in a certain layout using a specific copybook is through the use of BMC AMI DevX. I log in to the mainframe dataset and then browse using File-AID, but I'm using BMC AMI DevX application. I use it mainly for file extracts on my side and also to browse and do edits on files. Some of the other developers also do code on it. They do prefer to write code on it, but I still prefer the green screen.

I definitely think BMC AMI DevX could be improved or enhanced in terms of the logging in features. BMC AMI DevX's logging in feature is not so great. Whenever you try to log in, it always prompts you for passwords. Then when you have to switch sessions, because we usually have to switch between production and UAT, there's no quick way of switching between the two. Every time you try to switch, it prompts you to log in. Additionally, there's a pop-up that I always receive. When you click X on it, it doesn't disappear. Eventually, I just end up minimizing it. Furthermore, the startup of BMC AMI DevX takes a long time to start up before it loads. It doesn't just immediately start up and it's ready. It takes a good solid two to three minutes before it's ready so that you can work on it.

I would definitely say the features of BMC AMI DevX, specifically the speed, the extraction speed, have been the most useful. It's very quick compared to extracting a certain file directly from the mainframe itself. With mainframes, we deal with huge volumes of files or huge sizes of files. With BMC AMI DevX, when it comes to extracting, you just browse it, it quickly loads it with the exact layout as is. Then when you try to export the file to a CSV or to an Excel format, you just say export and immediately it's done. You don't even wait. On the other side, with the mainframe, you can do the very same file and it ends up taking 15 or 20 more minutes long. In some cases, it never even finishes extracting and it complains about the sizes. I don't encounter the same problem with BMC AMI DevX.

BMC AMI DevX's tools have affected my developers' productivity and efficiency by helping with the speed. It makes you more productive because now you're able to achieve more things quicker instead of struggling with trying to find other ways on mainframe. It helps you develop faster, produce files faster, and extract files faster.

I definitely think BMC AMI DevX could be improved or enhanced in terms of the logging in features. BMC AMI DevX's logging in feature is not so great. Whenever you try to log in, it always prompts you for passwords. Then when you have to switch sessions, because we usually have to switch between production and UAT, there's no quick way of switching between the two. Every time you try to switch, it prompts you to log in. Additionally, there's a pop-up that I always receive. When you click X on it, it doesn't disappear. Eventually, I just end up minimizing it. Furthermore, the startup of BMC AMI DevX takes a long time to start up before it loads. It doesn't just immediately start up and it's ready. It takes a good solid two to three minutes before it's ready so that you can work on it.

BMC AMI DevX's logins and the other ones I can understand because security has to be there, but I do feel that once I've logged in, I shouldn't need to log in again. The startup problem is the annoying one because if I want to do something, I need to open it two or three minutes earlier to give it time to load up. The startup problem is the one that definitely needs to be addressed.

I started using BMC AMI DevX from last year in January.

I think BMC AMI DevX is very stable. BMC AMI DevX is very stable for a modern application processing huge workloads. I've also seen some of the developers where they are able to compile huge amounts of code, which includes COBOL programs with a lot of lines. It produces reliable results there. I've never seen it complain about the huge amount of code that it has to read and compile. Even when I do extract files on my side, when I usually have issues extracting a huge amount of files on the mainframe, I don't encounter those problems with BMC AMI DevX.

From my perspective, I haven't seen BMC AMI DevX struggle in terms of workloads where it needs to be scaled up or scaled down. So far, based on what I've seen and using it, I haven't been at a point in time where I'm thinking that we need to scale up or we need more processing power from it. I think it's been very reliable. We haven't had the need to scale up or scale down from it.

I have not yet used the GenAI-powered code understanding features of BMC AMI DevX for COBOL or another language, unfortunately. I will definitely try and check them out.

I haven't used AI capabilities in BMC AMI DevX at all yet.

I have not leveraged the full-lifecycle Java support in BMC AMI DevX because we are strictly COBOL and we don't integrate with the other languages.

I've seen the Git features in relation to my use of z/Adviser, but because our CI/CD is through ISPW, we haven't used Git. We also don't use Git in our team specifically.

I think the hybrid CI/CD integration with existing enterprise DevOps tools in BMC AMI DevX is very good. When you do log into BMC AMI DevX, you are able to see all your datasets from the mainframe directly without having to do anything. You can see all your PDSs, all your folders, all your files. You don't have to log into something else again. You just log in once into BMC AMI DevX and everything is already there.

I do not often communicate directly with the technical support of BMC. I just know that whenever we have issues, we do contact our mainframe platform guys, and then they do contact BMC AMI DevX guys. We don't talk to them directly; we just contact our guys directly and then they will have the communications with the other external teams.

Before using BMC AMI DevX, I was strictly using the mainframe, which is the Flex Terminal terminal emulator. It was strictly that. I think we did at some point try to integrate VS Code, but it just created a lot of issues, then we just ended up saying, "Let's leave this thing."

I did not participate in the initial setup or installation of BMC AMI DevX. Unfortunately, by the time I arrived at the team, it was already there.

Before choosing BMC AMI DevX, there were no other options that we evaluated besides VS Code.

From that perspective, I don't think I can give input about the impact of automated DORA metrics tracking on my organization's decision-making processes because I don't participate most of the time in that department, which just checks how quick the jobs are run or what's the difference between the two. For that one, I don't think I have any input there.

I think BMC AMI DevX has provided overall benefits and a positive impact because I've seen a lot of developers, not just the new developers, but even the old developers. I'm very young, so I found a lot of old developers here that have been with the business for a while and have used the green screen their entire life. I've seen most of them also developing with BMC AMI DevX, migrating into the newer screen. They call it, "We are leaving the green screen," is what they say. They look at BMC AMI DevX as VS Code for COBOL developers, which is for us. I've seen it, not only from the old developers but even the young developers, I've seen most of them using it. I'm still in a process where I'm trying to do a sort of a hybrid style, use both. Where there's an advantage, I use this one, and where there's an advantage, I use that one. I do think it provides a more modern way of working with old technologies, with legacy systems. I think it's very good there. It's modernizing the legacy way of doing things, the mainframe.

I've gone to the official documentation or guides provided by BMC for BMC AMI DevX once or twice because I was still trying to find out more about it or what it is because when I landed, I didn't know what this workbench and BMC AMI DevX thing were. I did go to the website, but I didn't get the time to just go through everything. That's something I also need to do.

I think BMC AMI DevX's Open Borders approach is very good for maintaining my existing processes. I think it's very good in terms of its ability to integrate smoothly with the mainframe or the other applications. For that reason, I think its effect is very good. It's a very good effect because it doesn't disrupt existing processes or any of the existing applications. Instead, it sort of helps or integrates perfectly with them without disrupting. For example, if I was to go into a dataset with BMC AMI DevX and make changes, and then someone else logs on to the mainframe and tries to view those, they're also going to be able to pick them up. It's not that now I have to wait for something to happen or need to save on that side. It integrates smoothly, so everything just works smoothly and seamlessly.

Based on my experience with every aspect of BMC AMI DevX, I would rate this product an eight because I still feel there is room for me to explore on it, but so far from what I've seen, it's very good and it definitely has a huge amount of potential.

One example is when a COBOL batch program fails in production and I need to identify the exact issue. I use BMC AMI DevX mainly for debugging and analyzing the program flow. I start by checking the job output and abend details to understand where the failure occurred. Then I use the debugging capabilities to trace the COBOL program, check the values of variables at the point of failure, and follow the program flow to identify which piece of logic caused the problem.

Sometimes I get SOC7 data exceptions. I check the failing statement and the related data field to determine whether invalid numeric data was received. Once I identify the root cause, I make the required code or data correction through the normal change process, test it, and then promote the fix. So I mainly use BMC AMI DevX for debugging COBOL programs.

In a real-time example, when a batch job fails with a SOC7 abend, I check the job output and identify the failing program and statement. Then I use DevX to debug the program, check the variable values and data at the point of failure, and trace the program flow to find the root cause. After identifying the issue, I make the required fix, test it, and follow the change and deployment process.

Apart from debugging, I also find it useful for understanding existing COBOL programs and troubleshooting production issues. When I am working on a change, I can follow the program flow and check how data is moving between different sections and variables. It helps me understand the impact of a change before making code modifications. Overall, I use BMC AMI DevX mainly for debugging, code analysis, and faster root cause identification.

Mainly I use BMC AMI DevX when I need to debug and analyze COBOL programs. I start by checking the job output in SDSF to identify the failing program and statement, and I use DevX to step through the program, check variable values, and understand the program flow.

In my experience, the most useful features are the debugging capabilities, especially being able to step through COBOL programs, monitor variables, and understand the program flow. I also find the ability to identify the exact statement where an issue occurred very useful for production troubleshooting. Another useful aspect is that it helps me analyze existing code more efficiently. Overall, the main benefit for me is that it makes debugging more structured and reduces the time needed to identify the root cause of an issue.

The features I find most useful are source-level debugging and breakpoints, variable monitoring, program flow analysis, abend analysis and troubleshooting, code analysis, and interactive debugging. Overall, I find these features useful for faster root cause analysis, especially when troubleshooting COBOL programs in a mainframe environment.

One improvement I would appreciate is stronger integration between DevX debugging and other troubleshooting information, such as JCL, job output, abend details, and application logs, all in one place. It would also be useful to have more automated root cause suggestions for common abends like SOC7 and SOC4. That could reduce the amount of manual analysis and make production troubleshooting even faster. Overall, the current debugging capabilities are useful, but better integration and automation would make the experience more efficient.

One thing that stands out for me is the combination of debugging and code analysis capabilities. Being able to step through the COBOL program, set breakpoints, and monitor variable values gives me a much clearer picture of what is happening during execution. One feature I would find useful is an even deeper integration with production diagnostics where job logs, abend information, source code, and debugging could be brought together in one place. That could make production troubleshooting even faster. Overall, the debugging and analysis features are the ones I find most valuable in my daily work.

If I could suggest improvements, I would focus on making the user experience more intuitive, expanding practical documentation, and providing deeper integration between debugging, JCL, job output, and diagnostic information. Those additions would make an already useful tool even more convenient for mainframe developers and support teams.

I have around 3.4 years of experience in the mainframe field. Regarding BMC AMI DevX specifically, I have been exposed to its tools in the mainframe environment for almost 3 years.

BMC AMI DevX has been stable for my day-to-day mainframe development and debugging activities. I have not experienced major stability issues during normal use. It has been reliable for COBOL debugging, code analysis, and troubleshooting production incidents. Of course, stability can also depend on the organization's environment, configuration, and integration with other tools.

From a developer's perspective, I find BMC AMI DevX scalable for mainframe development and support workflows. It can support multiple developers for COBOL applications as they debug different problems without changing the overall development process. I don't have visibility into the organization's infrastructure capacity or user volume metrics, so I can't provide specific scalability numbers. But from my day-to-day usage, it handles my development and troubleshooting needs.

Support requests go through my cross-functional team via the company's support channels, so I don't interact directly with BMC support very often.

We also relied on the standard mainframe tools and manual troubleshooting methods such as ISPF, SDSF, job logs, dumps, and manually tracing COBOL code. We moved to DevX mainly to make debugging and code analysis more efficient. I don't have access to the organization's purchase or migration data, so I can't provide application ROI or license cost details. From a developer perspective, the main visible benefit I have seen is that it reduced the time needed to debug by 20 to 30 percent for troubleshooting tasks where DevX is applicable.

I would estimate that the debugging time for issues where I used DevX was reduced by around 20 to 30 percent, mainly because I could directly trace the program, check variable values, and identify the failing statement. I wouldn't say it eliminated recurring issues because those depend on the actual root cause and quality of the fix. But faster root cause identification helped me resolve incidents more consistently and reduced the amount of manual debugging effort.

From a developer perspective, the main alternatives to the DevX workflow are the standard z/OS tools I already used, such as ISPF, SDSF, diagnostic dumps, and manual COBOL code testing or tracing. BMC AMI DevX provides a more interactive debugging experience than that workflow. I cannot speak about a hands-on comparison with other third-party tools.

I would recommend evaluating BMC AMI DevX based on the specific needs of the mainframe development team. If the team spends a lot of time on COBOL application maintenance and production troubleshooting, the debugging and code analysis capabilities can be particularly useful. I would also suggest starting with a small group of developers, providing some hands-on training, and measuring things such as debugging time and incident resolution effort before expanding usage. Overall, I would say it is worth evaluating, especially for teams looking to make mainframe development and application maintenance more efficient. I would rate this product an 8 out of 10.

My main use case for BMC AMI DevX is to work with COBOL and JCL development on IBM. I mainly use it for editing, browsing data sets, submitting jobs, and debugging applications. I appreciate the Eclipse and VS Code style interface compared to traditional ISPF, which makes navigation easier.

One specific example of how I used BMC AMI DevX in my day-to-day work is maintaining a COBOL-based mainframe application. I used the DevX workbench to edit COBOL programs, browse data sets, submit JCL jobs, and debug batch job failures. One issue involved a batch job that was failing because of incorrect output data. Using the integrated debugger and job output, I traced the problem to the validation routine in the COBOL program. I fixed the logic, resubmitted the JCL, and verified that the job completed successfully.

In my day-to-day work, I mainly use BMC AMI DevX to streamline the mainframe development workflow rather than switching between multiple tools. My typical routine includes editing COBOL programs, submitting JCL jobs, reviewing job output, debugging failures, and browsing data sets from a single environment. I also use it to integrate debugging failures to trace program execution and identify logic or data issues more quickly. Overall, it reduces context switching and makes troubleshooting and code maintenance more efficient, although the initial setup and learning curve are challenging.

BMC AMI DevX helps me develop COBOL while juggling other responsibilities by bringing editing, debugging, job submissions, and code navigation into a single environment. This reduces context switching, allowing me to spend less time managing tools and more time on development, making it easier to balance COBOL work with my other responsibilities.

I have used the GenAI-powered code understanding features of BMC AMI DevX for COBOL, which helps me understand unfamiliar code much faster. The code navigation, dependencies analysis, and AI-assisted code explanation make it easier to see how different COBOL programs, copybooks, and JCL jobs are connected. Instead of tracing everything manually, I can quickly identify the program flow, understand business logic, and find where changes need to be made, significantly reducing the time it takes to get up to speed with legacy applications.

I have leveraged the full-lifecycle Java support in BMC AMI DevX for developing and maintaining Java applications that interact with mainframe services. The integrated debugging, code navigation, and monitoring tools make it easier to diagnose issues and application behavior across Java and mainframe. It is effective in troubleshooting because it allows me to quickly identify errors in variables and execution without switching between multiple tools, thus streamlining the development and debugging workflow.

The best features BMC AMI DevX offers are difficult for me to specify because I am using BMC AMI DevX in my day-to-day life.

A feature that surprised me about BMC AMI DevX is the Runtime Visualizer, which shows how programs interact at runtime, making it much easier to analyze application flow and troubleshoot dependencies.

BMC AMI DevX positively impacts my organization with its modern VS Code and Eclipse development environment, integrated debugging, AI-assisted code understanding, automated CI/CD pipelines, and end-to-end mainframe DevOps workflow.

Specific outcomes that show how BMC AMI DevX has positively impacted my organization include improvements in productivity, time saved, or reductions in errors. For instance, a Forrester Total Economic Impact study of organizations using BMC reported a 217% ROI, payback in under six months, and 26.2 million in benefits over three years for modeled enterprises with 300 mainframe developers. The study also found a 50% reduction in onboarding time for a new developer from about nine months to 4.5 months. Additionally, BMC highlighted customer examples such as reducing the efforts of moving changes from development to production from five hours to 18 minutes. I do not have firsthand organization metrics because I have not personally deployed BMC AMI DevX, but the published customer studies report improvements such as a 217% ROI, 50% faster onboarding, higher deployment frequency, and lower change failure rates, although I cannot claim those as my organization's results.

BMC AMI DevX is a strong platform, but there are a few areas where it could improve, such as simplifying the initial installation and configuration, especially for first-time users. It could also improve performance when working with very large mainframe applications or on slower network connections, and making the UI more intuitive so advanced features are easier to discover. These improvements would make the platform easier to adopt and more productive for both experienced mainframe developers and newcomers.

Regarding improvements needed for BMC AMI DevX, I would suggest making the UI more intuitive so advanced features are easier to discover and providing more built-in tutorials, guides, onboarding, and documentation for new developers.

I have been working for the last six months and completed an internship for about six months, so I have a total experience of one year.

BMC AMI DevX is very stable.

From what I have read, BMC AMI DevX appears to scale well for large enterprises, but I do not have personal experience running or managing it in a large-scale environment.

The customer support for BMC AMI DevX is very good.

I am not using a different solution before BMC AMI DevX.

The main challenges were the initial configuration and aligning the tooling with our existing enterprise processes.

I cannot say that I have personally seen a measurable return on investment because I was not involved in evaluating or deploying BMC AMI DevX in an organization. I do not have firsthand ROI data, but BMC has published customer studies reporting positive ROI, including a Forrester Total Economic Impact study that estimates a 217% ROI with payback in under six months for modeled enterprise deployments. However, those are published customer findings and not results from my own experience.

My understanding is that BMC AMI DevX is an enterprise product with custom licensing, so pricing is typically negotiated based on factors such as the modules purchased, organization size, and usage. I do not have direct experience with the commercial side or the total cost of ownership.

In evaluating options before choosing BMC AMI DevX, my organization considered various solutions in the market.

From what I have seen in the market, organizations evaluating BMC may also consider IBM Application Delivery Foundation for IBM Developer for z/OS, IBM Debugger, Debug for, and Broadcom Mainframe DevOps solutions. The product chosen usually depends on the existing mainframe environment, tooling, and DevOps strategies.

My advice to others looking into using BMC AMI DevX is to evaluate it against your organization's specific requirements rather than adopting it solely because of its feature list. If you are a large organization with COBOL applications and want to modernize development and DevOps workflow, it is worth evaluating. I recommend running a proof of concept with your own applications involving both experienced developers and newer developers, assessing integration with your existing source control, CI/CD, and security. Training is essential to get the most value from BMC AMI DevX. I would rate this product an 8.5 overall.

As the administrator of BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline, I set up applications, pipelines, associations, flags, and deployment. BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline's deployment process has three phases. The first phase moves the source code from ISPW's internal libraries to the production libraries. Then it performs the implementation phase, and the final phase is the activation phase. The activation phase moves the code and performs DB2 binds if DB2 is involved in the COBOL programs. During the activation phase, if there are any CICS modules, it performs new copies and phasing commands. It actually runs and kicks off those started tasks to handle the activation phase.

I could not compare how BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline has impacted my company positively because when I joined the company, this product was already installed. The organization had switched from Changeman to this product, ISPW, before my arrival, so I could not compare the benefits. BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline is secure and has really tight controls. Nothing can get into production without the proper approvals and following the policies. The developers prefer to use it and are happy with it.

The best feature of BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline that impresses me is the fallback functionality. The fallback functionality impresses me because when developers deploy large releases involving multiple components, such as COBOL programs, underlying copy books, and CICS modules, backing out changes would typically become a nightmare. With ISPW, developers can back out the entire release or entire package. If they deployed 100 components and want to back out everything, they can do so with one function and back out all components without worrying about backing out each individual component. They can back out the entire deployment set, which handles everything and brings them back to the previous versions. Developers can also selectively back out a subset of the deployed components. They also have the ability to revert to not just the most previous version but can go back several versions if they choose to do so. This gives them a lot of flexibility.

The only thing that bothers me about BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline is the screen movement. On the screens, I cannot move to fields easily. I have to put my cursor on the field and tap it to bring focus there, or use the tab key multiple times to get to a field on the screen. This sometimes bothers me. If BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline can improve the UI and user interface on the screens, that would be beneficial. Otherwise, I think the product works well.

I have been using BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline since 2019, which is seven years.

BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline is stable and reliable.

BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline runs on one LPAR, and no matter where someone is in the world, they have to use it on that LPAR. My company does not provide copies of this product on different LPARs. For example, my company has the product installed on one LPAR, let's say SysB. If someone is in India, another country, or another state in the United States and wants to use it, they have to use it on SysB and all log into that. BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline does have a PC version or internet version called Topaz. Again, it has to go to the same SysB and signs into the same SysB TSO and the same LPAR.

I have a very good experience with BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline customer service and technical support. Every time I open a case, I get an immediate response. Sometimes it takes a while for them to provide a solution, but they usually do. They are very responsive.

My company was using Changeman before adopting BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline. Changeman is another version control system that is similar in nature but did not have all the same functionalities that BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline offers. It was limited.

I was not here to see the initial setup of BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline, but I heard it took a while. A team of BMC engineers and developers came and sat with the company staff. It took them considerable time because the company had thousands of programs and underlying components, with DB2 and CICS involved. They had to study everything, take inventory of all the artifacts, and then set up sample applications in the product and test everything. I would assume the initial setup took at least a year.

My company is not currently considering changing to anything else regarding BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline. In the past, the company may have considered other products, but I do not know how many others are available. The only other option is cloud-based, but I do not think the company is going in that direction.

BMC AMI DevX Code Pipeline is a solid product that any company can benefit from if they want to have tight control and a standard way of deploying applications into production in a secure manner. This is an excellent product to work with. I give this product a rating of 9.

BMC AMI DevX solutions are primarily used for mainframe-based resources and application development, encompassing not only COBOL but also Workbench and VS Code for various purposes.

Data management tools like File-AID enhance these capabilities, with features such as Host Manager allowing access to UNIX files on the mainframe, collectively serving as platform operations tools for developers.

While I am aware of the possibility to integrate Git with BMC AMI DevX zAdviser, this integration does not fit within our solution landscape.

BMC AMI DevX offers source code management through a tool called Code Pipeline, which I have been using as a source code manager and for building with custom scripts rather than out-of-the-box functionality.

Code Pipeline also serves as an artifact manager and release manager, providing DevOps capabilities for our organization.

Workbench functions as an IDE for developers, and data management tools enable editing, updating, browsing datasets, and unit testing.

Code Insights, an AI-based solution, helps with code explanation and visualization.

BMC AMI DevX's IDE provides a modern development experience that new developers prefer, and Code Pipeline stands out as a very good standalone solution, though it requires openness at an enterprise scale.

File-AID and similar products are also excellent.

BMC AMI DevX tools have noticeably impacted our developers' productivity and efficiency.

New-age developers prefer VS Code-based or Eclipse-based solutions, which eliminate the need to remember commands, and this represents a significant gain.

The CI/CD offering allows integration of quality checks and unit test processes into the pipeline, which improves compliance and enhances productivity, enabling developers to focus on development while the pipeline automates integration.

To improve BMC AMI DevX, consideration should be given to cloud-style provisioning and development models, as well as integration of more AI capabilities.

Enhancements in VS Code extensions to develop BMC-specific agents that developers can use in their day-to-day work could also make a significant difference.

I have been working with BMC AMI DevX, specifically with the AMI DevX products from Compuware, the company that BMC acquired, for at least seven years.

Hybrid CI/CD integration with existing enterprise DevOps tools is good, and I would rate BMC AMI DevX as a stable solution that I have been using for years and find working fine.

BMC AMI DevX is absolutely scalable, and while I am not certain how to rate it precisely, I consider it a highly scalable solution.

I communicate often with BMC AMI DevX's technical support.

BMC AMI DevX's technical support responds very well and takes all cases seriously.

One case involved certificate-based authentication, which they implemented successfully, and I suggested enhancements for the DB2 pipeline that they are working on, such as adding a validate button on the command center, which I hope will be available next quarter.

I evaluated other tools based on existing tools I had for years, which led to integrating the entire DevX ecosystem into a solution rather than searching for completely new tools.

Before adopting BMC AMI DevX, I carried out proofs of concept and shortlisted solutions, though I did not formally complete implementation with others.

We use the solution clone test files.

The product has made our mainframe data management process easier. It has helped us save manhours. The tool's most valuable feature is the ability to edit tape files. Its ability to clone files is beneficial in application development. 

We plan to replace BMC Compuware File-AID due to its price. Two years back, we paid 11,000 dollars. However, the current price is 27,900 dollars. The price has increased to at least eight times its initial cost. We would need to pay around 60,000 dollars to have all three products together. We also encountered issues during version updates. 

I rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten. 

BMC Compuware File-AID is scalable. 

The tool's deployment is simple. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

Using BMC Data Management for IMS and DB2 on z/OS has greatly improved our database administration tasks. Although we don't test the database before production, we have experienced benefits in disaster recovery situations and capacity management. For instance, when facing capacity issues during peak transaction times, I've been able to quickly allocate additional resources to ensure smooth operations. This has been crucial, especially during times when the demand surges, such as peak flight hours.

BMC Data Management improved our data recovery process by simplifying it. With IMS, recovery meant reloading the last transaction backup to restore databases quickly during downtime. It has been effective, ensuring minimal disruption and enabling smooth operations even during recovery events.

One area for improvement with this product could be in providing clearer guidance and tools for disaster recovery planning and execution. As someone involved in managing infrastructure, understanding the steps and terminology around disaster recovery is crucial for effectively rebuilding the business after a disaster.

Within our company, which has many thousands of employees, the data management team, including project managers and other roles, typically consists of around 50 people.

I would rate the support as an eight out of ten.

Positive

Setting up IMS with BMC's data management solutions is straightforward, but it requires collaboration across different parts of the business to understand critical data and recovery needs. It involves imagining scenarios and planning for disaster recovery, ensuring that essential data and operations can be restored efficiently in case of a disaster. The number of people maintaining the solution varies depending on the enterprise size, but typically it ranges from five to ten individuals.

From my perspective as an infrastructure guy, the most valuable aspect of BMC's data management solutions was their ability to optimize CPU cycles, improving IMS performance without directly impacting the database. This helped ensure smoother operations and faster transaction processing without significant changes to the underlying data structures.

I wouldn't recommend this product over others without considering individual business needs. For a small company, an SQL solution might be more suitable. The choice between BMC and other solutions depends on factors like support and budget availability. Overall, I would rate BMC Data Management as an eight out of ten.

We do development for our customers and we use Topaz to do backend systems for some Latin American banks. It's for enterprise data. It runs on AWS. I'm working on performance testing to do batch performance tests doing step functions with AWS for processes running through the database. 

The enterprise data is mostly for web applications and users are mostly online. There are long-term processes or transactions. The solution helps with a variety of use cases. 

Users don't have to pay for on-prem servers. The application is mostly in the cloud. It can be used across many countries. It doesn't matter where you are, you can use the application anywhere, anytime. 

The solution does handle large amounts of data. Banking systems always have big data that takes a lot of time to get processed.

Test data management capabilities are good. Sometimes it can be difficult to align with the requirements of the customer as it isn't exactly like transactional data. 

It's a very complicated tool.

Sometimes the customer wants better, faster transaction times. They want the solution to move as fast as possible. We're trying to scale and grow our application with more servers to get the level of speed desired. Everything from small processes to big batch processing needs to be faster. 

I've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable for the most part. Mostly it is stable. Sometimes, if you have a beta version, it's not so stable. 

The scalablity is great and it scales well within AWS. You do have to understand the scalability within those systems, and you have to understand the network and how much processing you need, et cetera. 

We have thousands of users.

A lot of pipelines are executed during the installation process. The setup can be complex, depending on the parameters and requirements. Each pipeline could take an hour or more to implement. The compiling and testing processes take time. The security requirements and availability of the system are things that need to be considered at the outset. 

Maintenance is a big deal in the company I work with. The processes sometimes change from time to time and we need to adjust. 

I don't directly deal with the pricing side of the solution.

We use various versions of the solution.

I'd rate the solution overall at a seven out of ten.