We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and Oracle BPEL based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For developers, it is easy to orchestrate the workflows and the integration has been very easy."
"One of the most valuable features is the job templates. If we need to create an FTP job, we just drag over the FTP template and fill out the requirements using the variables that ActiveBatch uses. And that makes it reusable. We can create a job once but use it for many different clients."
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"The user interface is really incredible."
"We are able to integrate it into multiple third-party tools like email, backup, tracking systems, SharePoint, Slack alerts, etc."
"ActiveBatch can automate predictable, repeatable processes very well. There is no real trick to what ActiveBatch does. ActiveBatch does exactly what you would expect a scheduling piece of software to do. It does it in a timely manner and does it with very little outside interference and fanfare. It runs when it is supposed to, and I don't have to jump through a bunch of hoops to double check it."
"The REST API adapters and native integrations for integrating and orchestrating the software stack are very flexible."
"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."
"The product has everything we need."
"What I find the most valuable about Oracle BPEL is that it saves me time."
"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"They should offer pricing that is more affordable."
"Whenever there is an overload, we are seeing crashes happening."
"ActiveBatch is a little complex."
"We have faced a couple of issues where we were supposed to log a defect with ActiveBatch. That said, the Active batch Vendor Support is very responsive and reliable."
"The thing I've noticed the most is the Help function. It's very difficult, at times, to find examples of how to do something. The Help function will explain what the tool does, but we're not a Windows shop at the data warehouse. Our data warehouse jobs actually run on Linux servers. Finding things for Linux-based solutions is not as easy as it is for Windows-based solutions. I would like to see more examples, and more non-Windows examples as well, in the Help."
"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."
"There is this back and forth, where ActiveBatch says, "Your Oracle people should be dealing with this," and Oracle people say, "No, we don't know anything about ActiveBatch." Then, it all falls back on me as to what happens. Nobody is taking responsibility. This is the biggest failing for ActiveBatch."
"Some user-defined functions for transformation must be added to the next release of the solution."
"In the next release, I would like to see REST improved and new technologies for microservices. I'd like to see more containers for separating containers."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 6th in Process Automation with 35 reviews while Oracle BPEL is ranked 18th in Process Automation with 2 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while Oracle BPEL is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle BPEL writes "A highly scalable solution that provides various features for the execution of business processes". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and VisualCron, whereas Oracle BPEL is most compared with Camunda and BizTalk Server. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Oracle BPEL report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.