We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch Workload Automation and AppWorx Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: ActiveBatch Workload Automation offers a versatile and user-friendly interface with prebuilt jobs and streamlined batch processing. It also provides process automation, PowerShell and VBScript features, and real-time job scheduling and monitoring. The automation is scalable and intelligent, and it has REST API adapters and native integrations. AppWorx Workload Automation focuses on simplicity and reliable performance. It has a user-friendly interface and is specifically designed for running nightly jobs and conducting calculations and processes during nighttime hours.
ActiveBatch Workload Automation could benefit from improvements in managed file transfer, transitioning to a subscription model, incorporating cloud aspects, enhancing the user interface, enhancing cloud platform capabilities, integrating with DevOps, improving beginner-friendliness, optimizing the help center, streamlining software setup, refining email alerts, addressing lag/stability issues, expanding customization options, and enhancing customer support. Users of AppWorx Workload Automation are seeking improvements in API integration, better integration with other tools, and enhanced scalability.
Service and Support: ActiveBatch Workload Automation has been commended for its excellent customer service, characterized by dependable technical support. Nevertheless, there are concerns regarding the service model and availability of the hotline. AppWorx Workload Automation has garnered praise for its outstanding customer support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for ActiveBatch Workload Automation is straightforward and uncomplicated, with no significant challenges encountered. However, there is a slight requirement for additional documentation when importing files. The setup for AppWorx Workload Automation is relatively simple, although it may seem intricate to individuals who are unfamiliar with the system. It necessitates the involvement and access of an administrator.
Pricing: Based on user feedback, ActiveBatch Workload Automation is favored over AppWorx Workload Automation for its lower initial investment requirement. Users have reported cost-effectiveness and affordability as key advantages of ActiveBatch.
ROI: ActiveBatch Workload Automation has received positive feedback from users regarding its effectiveness and financial advantages. Users have reported substantial growth in net revenue. There is a lack of information regarding the return on investment for AppWorx Workload Automation.
Comparison Results: ActiveBatch is the preferred product. ActiveBatch offers a simpler setup process, versatile and user-friendly features, excellent scheduling and monitoring capabilities, and a highly regarded alerting mechanism. It also provides scalability, intelligent automation, and seamless integration with various systems.
"ActiveBatch's Self-Service Portal allows our business units to run and monitor their own workloads. They can simply run and review the logs, but they can't modify them. It increases their productivity because they are able to take care of things on their own. It saves us time from having to rerun the scripts, because the business units can just go ahead and log in and and rerun it themselves."
"As far as centralization goes it's nice because we can see all these processes that are tied to this larger process. The commissions, FTP processing, the reporting, the file moves to the business users — all that is right there. It's very easy to read. It's easy to tie it together, visually, and see where each of these steps fits into the bigger picture."
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."
"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."
"Since I started using this product, I have been able to easily track everything as it mainly monitors, alerts, and looks after all the services - even across platform scheduling - which has helped me immensely."
"The user interface is really incredible."
"By implementing a sophisticated scheduling mechanism, the system allows for the precise triggering of jobs at user-selected frequencies, enabling a seamless and automated execution of tasks according to specified time intervals."
"The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"It is really a robust product."
"The interface is good."
"It is an object-based approach to task and process design in conjunction with conditional logic and event-based scheduling actions, which enables a build once/use often design methodology to be employed."
"It has improved my organization through automation of back office and infrastructure procedures, and by integrating and orchestrating key business applications spanning multiple technology stacks."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"The monitoring dashboard could have been more user-friendly so that in the monitoring dashboard itself we can see the total number of jobs created in the system and how many were currently active/scheduled/chained."
"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud."
"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had it."
"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."
"The UI could potentially offer a more refined and user-friendly experience, fostering smoother interactions and facilitating easier navigation for users engaging with the application."
"There are some issues with this version and finding the jobs that it ran. If you're looking at 1,000 different jobs, it shows based on the execution time, not necessarily the run time. So, if there was a constraint waiting, you may be looking for it in the wrong time frame. Plus, with thousands of jobs showing up and the way it pages output jobs, sometimes you end up with multiple pages on the screen, then you have to go through to find the specific job you're looking for. On the opposite side, you can limit the daily activity screen to show only jobs that failed or jobs currently running, which will shrink that back down. However, we have operators who are looking at the whole nightly cycle to make sure everything is there and make sure nothing got blocked or was waiting. Sometimes, they have a hard time finding every item within the list."
"The reporting needs improvement. There is a real need for the ability to generate audit reports on the fly. It needs to be a lot easier than what I can do right now. This is a major item for me."
"They could provide an easier installation guide or technical support to the organizations during the installation process."
"The scalability could improve."
"It is not really scaling per say because they are not putting much into it. They are trying to push their new product."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"It has been a deprecated product, because it is so old. There has been a couple of new solutions that are a little more advanced."
"It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD)."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 4th in Workload Automation with 35 reviews while AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, VisualCron and IBM Workload Automation, whereas AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Automic Workload Automation, Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. AppWorx Workload Automation report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.