We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch Workload Automation and Tidal 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 is highly praised for its versatility and ease of use. Users appreciate the prebuilt jobs and real-time monitoring capabilities, as well as the automatic scheduling feature. Tidal Automation is known for its excellent job scheduling and single pane of glass interface, which allows for convenient management. Users also value the flexibility in running jobs and the data security features offered by Tidal Automation.
ActiveBatch could improve licensing, user interface, trigger reliability, documentation, support services, and integration capabilities. Tidal Automation could benefit from enhancements in its user interface, pricing model, integration options, and customization features.
Service and Support: Users have provided positive feedback for the customer service of ActiveBatch Workload Automation, appreciating the helpfulness, reliability, and responsiveness of the support team. However, there are concerns regarding the service model and availability of the hotline. Tidal Automation has highly praised customer service that is responsive, knowledgeable, and willing to assist. The experienced support team promptly addresses problems, although there are occasional mentions of lower-priority items being overlooked.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for ActiveBatch Workload Automation was smooth and straightforward, without any significant challenges. However, there was a minor requirement for additional documentation during the file import. The setup for Tidal Automation was described as easy to handle and uncomplicated, with useful documentation available. Some users expressed a desire for more training to tackle complex tasks.
Pricing: Users find the setup cost for ActiveBatch Workload Automation to be quick and straightforward. The pricing is seen as reasonable and competitive. Tidal Automation's pricing is also fair and predictable, with a transparent licensing model. However, some users mention the complexity of licensing when additional adapters are required.
ROI: ActiveBatch Workload Automation is highly regarded for its ability to enhance net revenue, offering a valuable solution. Tidal Automation streamlines operations, mitigates risks, and consolidates tasks, providing substantial benefits in terms of reducing manual efforts and improving overall job management.
Comparison Results: Tidal Automation is the favored choice over ActiveBatch Workload Automation. Users commend Tidal Automation's job scheduler, streamlined interface, and ability to run jobs on various servers. The user-friendly interface and seamless integration with other systems are also highly regarded.
"ActiveBatch provides summary reports and logs for further analysis and improvements in monitoring servers, which is very handy."
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."
"It can connect to a number of third-party/legacy systems."
"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."
"It has helped with scheduling complex jobs with simple scripts."
"We leverage the solution's native integrations regularly. We have to get files from a remote server outside the organization, and even send things outside the organization. We use a lot of its file manipulation and SFTP functionality for contacting remote servers."
"The product offers a centralized platform for managing activities across many environments, applications, etc."
"We wouldn't be able to do many of the complex scheduling that we do today without it. For us, it is a mission-critical app. Because if it doesn't work or has a problem, then SAP doesn't function. It is that critical. So, it's an essential tool for us to manage and run SAP jobs."
"It's easy to use and easy to administer, and it's very flexible."
"From a management standpoint, when using the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads, I've never had a problem with the application. It's very interactive, especially with the different security levels that they offer."
"The best feature is that it allows task scheduling based on particular occurrences, like the receipt of files, database updates, or system notifications."
"One of the most useful features is being able to set up a schedule and create dependencies. The calendar can kick off processes at certain times, based on dependencies that you specify, like time, or whether another process has finished. Dependencies are the most useful thing."
"With other tools, you do not have the ability to schedule jobs on their own. You need to create a group and then assign everything to that group. Only then will the job be able to execute. In Tidal, you can schedule a single job and there is no need to create a group. That's what I like the most."
"The most valuable feature is the job scheduler, where you can schedule thousands of jobs to execute at specific times."
"Tidal Workload Automation Software provides the ability to quickly adapt to changing business requirements."
"One thing I've noticed is that navigation can be difficult unless you are familiar with the structure that we have in place. If someone else had to look at our ActiveBatch console and find a job, they might not know where to find it."
"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."
"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."
"It does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex. You have to learn how it does things. I don't know if it's any worse than any other tool would be, just because of the nature of what it does... the learning curve is the hardest part."
"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."
"A cloud option is not provided as a free feature, making it a costly solution for smaller organizations."
"A nice thing to have would be the ability to comfortably pass variables from one job to another. That was one of the things that I found difficult."
"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."
"We've had some quirky stuff happen on an occasional basis where a job does not take off. For example, a job we expected to be finished by 3:00 a.m. is sitting there and not executing when we come in in the morning. We have to go all the way back to the dependencies and then we can see that one of the dependencies has become unscheduled, for some reason. No changes were made to the schedule but this prerequisite job has, all of a sudden, become unscheduled. I have brought this up with Tidal's support but they have never had an answer for it."
"Their software installation and update process could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure they're working on that, but that's definitely an area where it could be streamlined a lot. There's still a lot of manual work that you have to do with the schedule when you deploy masters or do the agents."
"The product’s UI is outdated. They should work on this particular area."
"I know they are working on it, but there needs to be better reporting. Currently, there are only three or four reports that we can get off of the system. That needs to be improved. They already have a solution to this in the new version. I.e., a schedule of all the jobs running for one day, specifically calling out what dependencies that job relies on. It would be like a flow chart of how the day's jobs would run."
"The biggest improvement they need to work on is doing better QA checks before they release new patches and service packs. We do find that you can't trust getting the new product right away, as they have to get some bug fixes out. They do tend to have some bugs in the first iteration."
"When we patch to the next version, there is often a little thing that breaks. It has rarely been a big deal, but I always seem to have to follow up on one tiny issue. It would help if they had some better QA testing of their patches."
"One thing I would like to see improved is that, currently, when an action is executed and finishes in Tidal, it's marked as either "success" or "failure." I would like more options that would flag a job according to multiple options, rather than just "good" or bad"... Tidal has told us that it's possible to do so through the product or with a workaround."
"I'm still hoping with Explorer to be able to see end-to-end job streams. That's not really something that's easy to see today in the web client. However, I haven't worked with Explorer yet. One of the things that we have found frustrating is not being able to see an end-to-end job stream across multiple applications within Tidal. We use jobs for that right now, but I have high hopes that we'll be able to see that in Explorer."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 4th in Workload Automation with 35 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while Tidal by Redwood 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 Tidal by Redwood writes "Great visibility with a single pane of glass and a low learning curve". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, VisualCron, IBM Workload Automation and Redwood RunMyJobs, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs and Rocket Zeke. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Tidal by Redwood 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.
