What is our primary use case?
My main use case for BMC AMI DevX is mainframe application development and maintenance, especially working with COBOL and JCL applications. I use BMC AMI DevX for code development, debugging, analyzing program flow, and troubleshooting issues in both batch and online applications.
One example of how I used BMC AMI DevX in a recent project was troubleshooting a production issue in a COBOL batch job where the output was incorrect. I used BMC AMI DevX to step through the program, inspect variable values, and identify the issue in the processing logic, which made debugging much faster than manually tracing the code.
I also use BMC AMI DevX for code navigation and impact analysis when making changes to existing mainframe applications. It is especially useful for understanding dependencies between COBOL programs, copybooks, and JCL, which helps reduce the risk of introducing issues during maintenance.
How has it helped my organization?
BMC AMI DevX has positively impacted my organization by mainly improving developer productivity, as it makes debugging and application analysis faster. In my experience, it has reduced the time spent tracing COBOL issues and understanding existing code, which helps us resolve maintenance issues more efficiently.
I estimate that I save around 15 to 20% of my time now compared to before using BMC AMI DevX, particularly during debugging and code analysis. On a typical week, that could mean saving roughly four to six hours, depending on the complexity of the issues and application being worked on.
BMC AMI DevX definitely helps me develop COBOL while juggling other responsibilities, as it keeps me productive when I handle multiple COBOL development and maintenance tasks because debugging, code navigation, and analysis are available in one environment. It reduces the time I spend switching between tools and manually tracing issues.
Regarding how BMC AMI DevX's automated DORA metrics tracking affects my organization's decision-making processes, it had a moderate to positive impact by giving us better visibility into development and troubleshooting activity. It helps teams identify recurring issues and areas for improvement, although we still combine those metrics with developer feedback and project-level data before making decisions.
BMC AMI DevX has helped improve our deployment frequency and reduce change failure rates, but I would describe the impact as moderate rather than dramatic. Based on our experience, deployment frequency improved by roughly 10 to 15%, while change failure rates came down by around 5 to 10%, mainly through better visibility and process improvements.
BMC AMI DevX tools have affected my developers' productivity and efficiency positively compared to prior solutions, as it mainly reduces the time spent on debugging and understanding existing COBOL applications. I estimate around a 15 to 20% improvement in overall developer productivity, with debugging and code analysis seeing the biggest gains.
I evaluate BMC AMI DevX's Open Borders approach on maintaining our existing processes as having a positive impact because it allows us to maintain our existing mainframe processes without requiring major changes to our established workflows. It also makes it easier to connect mainframe development with newer tools and practices while keeping the existing applications and processes largely intact.
What is most valuable?
In my opinion, the best features BMC AMI DevX offers are the debugging capabilities, which are probably the most useful feature for me, as I can step through COBOL programs and inspect variables while troubleshooting. I also find the code navigation, program analysis, and integration with the mainframe development environment helpful for day-to-day maintenance work.
BMC AMI DevX's debugging tools make it much easier to trace the program flow and monitor variables' values without adding a lot of temporary code. For example, while troubleshooting a batch job with an unexpected calculation result, I could step through the COBOL logic and quickly identify where the value was getting changed.
BMC AMI DevX's integration with the existing mainframe development workflows is also useful, especially when working across source code, JCL, data sets, and related application components. BMC AMI DevX's analysis and navigation features help me understand dependencies faster when modifying legacy applications.
Regarding BMC AMI DevX's AI capabilities, I think the governance and security aspects are generally solid, particularly because it operates within established mainframe access controls and enterprise security practices. I would still like more visibility into AI-specific controls such as auditability, data handling, and how AI-generated recommendations are governed.
In my assessment, the accuracy and reliability of BMC AMI DevX's AI output are generally useful and reasonably accurate, especially for code analysis and assisting with understanding existing mainframe code. However, I would not rely on it blindly for production changes; I still validate the suggestions against the application logic and test results.
I have used BMC AMI DevX's GenAI-powered code understanding features for COBOL to get a quick overview of unfamiliar programs and understand the purpose of different sections. It helps reduce the initial analysis time, but I still verify the generated explanation against the actual code before making changes.
What needs improvement?
An area for improvement in BMC AMI DevX would be the user interface and overall usability, which can feel a little complex for new users coming from modern development tools. Better documentation, easier navigation, and more intuitive workflows would reduce the learning curve, especially for occasional users.
Integration with newer DevOps and CI/CD tools could be improved further in BMC AMI DevX, especially for teams working with modern development pipelines. I would also like to see more troubleshooting guidance and practical examples in the documentation, so resolving common issues requires less dependency on support teams.
I rate BMC AMI DevX an 8 because the user experience can still feel less intuitive compared to modern development tools, especially for new users. I would also like to see stronger integration with modern DevOps and CI/CD workflows and more streamlined documentation.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using BMC AMI DevX for around one and a half years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
In my experience, BMC AMI DevX has been stable for day-to-day mainframe development and debugging, as we have not faced major stability issues, although like any enterprise tool, the experience can depend on the environment and configuration.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I would say BMC AMI DevX's scalability has been good for our environment, as it handles larger development teams and complex mainframe applications without major issues, and the integrated tooling becomes more valuable as the number of applications and developers grows.
How are customer service and support?
BMC AMI DevX's customer support has been good overall.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before using BMC AMI DevX, we relied more on traditional mainframe development and debugging tools, including ISPF-based tools, which is why we switched to BMC AMI DevX because it provided a more integrated development and debugging experience, making code analysis and troubleshooting faster and easier for the team.
What was our ROI?
I can confirm that we have seen a return on investment with BMC AMI DevX, mainly through the time savings rather than reduced headcount. Roughly, we have saved around four to six developer hours per week on debugging and code analysis, which I estimate translates to around a 15 to 20% productivity improvement for the developers using it regularly.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for BMC AMI DevX is that I would describe the pricing and licensing as reasonable for an enterprise mainframe tool, although the overall cost can be significant depending on the number of users and components licensed. Setup was fairly straightforward in our environment, but understanding the licensing structure and getting the right components initially took some effort.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We have looked at a few alternatives before choosing BMC AMI DevX, mainly IBM Developer for z/OS and traditional ISPF-based development and debugging tools. We compared them mainly on the debugging capabilities, code analysis, ease of use, and integration with our existing mainframe environment before choosing BMC AMI DevX.
What other advice do I have?
My advice for others looking into using BMC AMI DevX is to evaluate it based on your existing mainframe environment and the specific development workflows you need to improve. I especially recommend doing a hands-on trial with the debugging and code analysis because that is where I saw the biggest productivity benefit. I rate BMC AMI DevX an 8 overall.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises