BMC AMI Ops Reviews

I have been using BMC AMI Ops for one and a half years.

My main use case for BMC AMI Ops is mostly for automation, specifically different kinds of job automation. Depending on the conditions that match, there are scripts that need to be run. With the help of this tool, we run multiple scripts when the conditions are satisfied.

An example of how I use BMC AMI Ops for automation is that my job is not focused on scheduling or creating any job. My job is very limited to rerunning, restarting, and troubleshooting jobs. Although I have never automated any job, I have exposure to automating a small job. For instance, if the conditions are satisfied, we need to run a particular script, and there, we can use BMC AMI Ops.

I don't have anything else to add about my main use case or any other ways BMC AMI Ops helps me in my role because my role is very limited.

Regarding BMC AMI Ops's AI capabilities, I haven't used the AI feature extensively. However, I was impressed by what I saw at a BMC roadshow concerning how the AI works. I don't have much interaction with BMC AI so far, so I can't comment much on that.

Since I don't have much interaction with the AI in my day-to-day work with BMC AMI Ops, I prefer not to comment on its accuracy and reliability of output.

In my opinion, the best features BMC AMI Ops offers are all the features, as I like them overall. The most important feature is when there is a job that is waiting for some input or prerequisite. We don't have to dig manually a lot; we can just click an option on the job page to find out why the job is waiting, what it is waiting for, and what the prerequisites are.

I use that feature to check job prerequisites or troubleshoot issues quite often, and it does save me a lot of time compared to manual digging. If that feature is not there, I will have to check the neighbors, the successor job, the predecessor jobs, and then check each job and the entire flow. Instead of all that digging, I can simply click on that particular option to get the exact answer I need, regarding why the job is waiting and what needs to be done.

Another feature I rely on often is the viewpoint feature, where we can apply multiple filters and generate reports about various jobs, such as specific folders, applications, sub-applications, and sub-folders. These filters help us get the exact results we want on our dashboard, allowing us to manage the jobs that require our focus. The viewpoint feature is very important.

BMC AMI Ops has positively impacted my organization in multiple ways, especially in automation, as we do not have to manually run or search for or run scripts. When the conditions match, we can simply schedule the jobs, and it will run that script automatically. Without this feature, we would have to keep human resources available to monitor jobs 24/7, matching conditions and running scripts. This automation has helped us significantly.

I can't say how BMC AMI Ops can be improved because my role is very limited, and I have not explored the entire tool in my organization yet, so I can't comment on that.

Regarding needed improvements, by default, when we open a viewpoint, we don't see the jobs in a linear way. If all jobs could be displayed in the correct flow by default, it would be better. For example, Job 1 should run first, then Job 2, and so on. Sometimes, I find Job 1 somewhere down, Job 3 somewhere up, and Job 4 somewhere else. The jobs should be arranged sequentially by default; this could be improved.

BMC AMI Ops is very stable. Whenever there is maintenance work, the tools admin takes good care of it, so there is not much impact on downtimes. Therefore, I would say it's a very stable tool.

Regarding the scalability of BMC AMI Ops, I can say that it is scalable. My organization is a bank, and at the end of every month, some delays occur in the jobs due to a lack of CPU resources. The company is not ready to increase CPU capacity because only at the end of the month are those resources in high demand. I have not worked on scalability much as I'm only responsible for the jobs, but I see the tools admin doing some work behind the scenes to manage resources when more jobs need to be run.

I can't share specific metrics about return on investment, as I'm not the correct person for this query. However, I can say that after deploying this tool, we have saved costs and reduced the need for employees, leading to less manual work.

My advice for others looking into using BMC AMI Ops is to get certified from BMC while using this product. It will really make your life easy and help your organization, especially in the banking and BFSI sectors. Since I am BMC certified, I emphasize the importance of getting good training to effectively use this tool in day-to-day operations. I give this review a rating of 8 out of 10.

I use BMC AMI Ops to maintain its usability for the main team so that the main team can use the product to install it for various clients. BMC AMI Ops is a product that is given to us by a vendor, and we run a couple of jobs called JCL, which is a language in mainframes. Mainframes are a really old kind of technology. In mainframes, we use all these vendor products to help our clients manage their own system.

BMC AMI Ops offers an analysis of the mainframe system. It has automation, AI features, and can keep track of storage, providing a whole analysis of the mainframe system.

I prefer automation the most out of automation, AI features, and storage tracking. I think AI is only going to get bigger as we evolve with technology, and AI is only going to help us grow.

BMC AMI Ops has improved outcomes for my team, and it has definitely improved outcomes for the clients that we serve. The real reason we maintain these products is for our clients.

The client was able to use BMC AMI Ops to track their usage of the system. The client was able to automate a lot of the processes in their system, and that helped them.

I would like to see more AI in BMC AMI Ops, such as an AI feature that lets you keep track of storage in some way, perhaps some kind of automatic disk cleanup.

I have been working here since January of 2026. It has been about a month since I started using BMC AMI Ops.

BMC AMI Ops customer support is pretty good, but I have not had any experience with it. I would rate the customer support of BMC AMI Ops an eight on a scale of one to ten.

I am not aware if we previously used a different solution because I actually just started this January of 2026.

I do not deal with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for BMC AMI Ops. I am not a salesperson.

The implementation team is something that the client chooses regarding BMC AMI Ops. If the client wants a specific software vendor package, we give it to them.

I would not know if there has been a return on investment because I am not a sales person.

I do not deal with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for BMC AMI Ops. I am not a salesperson.

I am not aware if we previously used a different solution because I actually just started this January of 2026.

I would not really know how BMC AMI Ops's observability and AI Ops-driven early detection feature has helped in identifying abnormal behavior early because I think the main team really uses the features. I am just aware of the features.

Only the main team would know the real usage of the integrated monitoring, automation, and open telemetry features in BMC AMI Ops. I only know the features.

I assume BMC AMI Ops has helped in improving mean time to detection, MTTD because the main team usually says that it was implemented well.

I do not really know other companies and how they use BMC AMI Ops, but I am sure it is a great product.

I liked this interview because I got to see how AI works. I would appreciate a short poem or haiku that will summarize my review. My overall review rating for BMC AMI Ops is eight.

BMC AMI Ops offers excellent features including the monitoring dashboard and alerts, which I appreciate even though I only used them at a basic level.

BMC AMI Ops positively impacted my organization during the evaluation phase. The main benefit was improved visibility into the mainframe environment, providing a clear view of alerts and system status.

My experience with BMC AMI Ops was limited, but during this evaluation, I believe it could be improved by making some features easier for new users to understand, probably with better guidance or more practical examples.

I was not directly involved in the deployment process of BMC AMI Ops, so I don't have enough details about the architecture.

I rate BMC AMI Ops an eight out of ten.

I choose eight because I used it for a limited time and found it to be a useful tool, but I don't give a higher score because my experience was very limited.

Regarding BMC AMI Ops's AI capabilities, I don't have enough experience with detailed assessment because my usage was mainly focused on basic monitoring, so I cannot provide more information about the security aspect in depth. I didn't use the AI capability actively, so I cannot provide a deep evaluation based on my monitoring experience.

I can only assess the unified operations experience provided by BMC AMI Ops in terms of system health visibility across mainframe systems and subsystems at a basic level, as my experience was limited. I only found improved visibility into system health for basic monitoring of the system.

I am not using the observability and AIOps-driven early detection feature in BMC AMI Ops. I have not used the integrated monitoring, automation, and open telemetry features in BMC AMI Ops.

BMC AMI Ops has not helped in improving mean time to detection (MTTD), and I don't have any information or example to share.

My advice to others looking into using BMC AMI Ops is to evaluate it based on operational needs and to test it in your own environment, as it can be useful for improving monitoring and visibility. My overall rating for this product is eight out of ten.

We use TM-AE for batch job management. Not only does it help enforce some of our standards, but allows us to control where certain jobs run based on licensed software. The service level and automated capacity manager functions allow us to control priorities, support SLA's and manage our 4HRA and reduce MLC for some software bills.

Software access control (SAC) limits systems where some of our products are not licensed. Again, the automated capacity manager helps manage our workload and reduce priorities of discretionary work so the critical path batch jobs are completed within the policy defined at our site.

Job binding services (JBS) is used by SAC, but also helps with our datas sharing environments. Any job can have multiple affinities (like SCHENV on steroids) associated to allow the job to run in a JESMAS and find all of the resources on a particular LPAR to satisfy requirements.

Our scheduler managed batch has standard checking prior to promotion. Enforcement of JCL standards for end user desktop submitted jobs has been very positive. We change processes (especially SYSOUT classes) based on standards to manage output.

There currently is a WUI that allows an operator a single pane of glass to see how TM is performing to meet service policies within a JESMAS environment. This is a new feature and multiple individuals have expressed desire to not only see real time monitoring, but the ability to historically go back at least several hours or possibly an entire day to review history.

There have been little or no issues with the software as delivered.  We maintain the ability to run directly under WLM without TM if needed, but manage ALL batch via TM to make sure we receive maximum value from the tool.

TM can run on a single member or multiple member JESMAS configuration.

All cases are responded to in a timely manner.  The always provide valuable feedback or immediate solutions to an issue.

No, prior to data sharing and other initiatives we exploited a single affinity SCHENV and only scheduled batch processing was managed for standards.

Installed product in couple of hours.  The time has been spent creating and modifying policies along with the job action language coded to exploit functions. 

The vendor team met with us weekly to make sure we had the resources and answers to make our install successful.

Batch smoothing our 4HRA and implementation of group capacity profiles has allowed us to run sub-capacity and lower our MLC.  

The TM team was very helpful getting us started.  They provided a detailed project plan as a guide to successful implementation.  Installing the software is very easy, but the time is spent building you policies for service levels, capacity management and action code language used to tie all of the components together.

No

MainView is used as a central point of view to control and monitor systems on the mainframe like z/OS, CICS, MQSeries IMS, or DB2. 

MainView has enabled me, in the past, to solve production problems faster, or even avoid them preemptively with warnings.

The integration of IMS commands is very useful, because you do not have to switch to another tool to problem solve solutions.

More visualisation and support for mobile devices would be good. An expansion for distributed systems would be great, but probably not workable.

We did use IBM OMEGAMON, but switched to BMC MainView, because it is easier to use, more flexible, and it also came in a software package.

If you already use other products from BMC, you might be able to get a package deal from BMC's sales department.

Yes, we had IBM OMEGAMON, but decided against continuing to use it, because BMC MainView was more valuable.