"It seems like it would scale well."
"Having the jobs laid out while attaching dependencies is a nice addition to the program."
"Thus far we have only had a few minor problems, all of which the vendor addressed quickly. We have not encountered any major problems. The product is very stable and reliable."
"For us, the most valuable feature of the solution is the file transfer piece and being able to automate the moving of files around between our various vendors. It reduces the time involved versus somebody having to individually move the files around."
"File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder."
"With a simple click of a button in self-service, the department or the user can complete his/her job."
"There are a lot of valuable features. The version that we're currently casting, Self Service, is going to be the most valuable to us. It is going to allow us to open up the doors, broaden our automation capability and help other business units to be able to automate a lot of the little things that they do from day to day. I'm really looking forward to being able to help other areas with their automation needs. Self Service is really key."
"The whole product is valuable to us because of the integrations that it has with the MCP and the Windows environments. You have to have the agent on each one of them that you want to monitor. The integrations that we have created are along the lines of extracting files and sending them through SFTP to another vendor. Those are the things that were taking a lot of time away from my staff."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"Stonebranch performs well, and the graphical representation is excellent. Overall, it requires more technical effort from our teams, but the solution is intuitive, so anybody can use it."
"I like the dashboard and the various workflows."
"The features are upgraded, and every six months they're releasing patches."
"The interface is very user-friendly and easy to navigate."
"We are still in the early stages of our implementation, so at this point, I cannot see any needed improvements or features."
"The logs are a little daunting to look at the first few times, however, as you begin to understand what you're looking at, it becomes easier."
"It would be great if you could create physically separate "clients," as I call them. I wish I could have a production client and a testing client and that they would be separate."
"I would like to see OpCon being accessible using a mobile app."
"More functionality within self-service would be greatly appreciated."
"Enterprise Manager is a little clunky which I know they're addressing in the solution's manager."
"Of course they have a RESTful API within OpCon, but they have that new web services agent that we installed because we have some SOAP APIs and we had to interact with SMA to get things running. Our developers did do some tweaks, but we have now been able to get some test jobs running, and understand how the workflow goes back and forth."
"There are some limitations in the actual jobs that are created and how you're able to rename files. Suppose you're bringing in, say, 10, 15, or 20 reports from a core system, and you're using an "asterisk character" to identify files. For example, if you're grabbing files that start with this, end with this, but the characters in between could be different, it has to retain that same name in the destination. It won't allow you to rename them with a date stamp or the like."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"It would be ideal if they had the exact same features as the CA Workload Automation DE series. It would be helpful to have calendaring options."
"I would rate Stonebranch somewhere in the middle for ease of setup. It wasn't too straightforward for us because our infrastructure is complex."
"It's not available on the cloud, so they should take that due to safety, security, and scalability."
"It can't handle negative written codes."
More Stonebranch Universal Automation Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Automate repetitive tasks so you can focus on projects that drive your business forward. Find out how OpCon workload automation enables you to create repeatable, reliable workflows - all managed from a single platform.
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 15th in Workload Automation with 1 review while Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 4 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 6.0, while Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "Good scheduling feature; reporting, forecasting, and intelligence could all be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Stonebranch Universal Automation Center writes "Allows you to schedule jobs on applications like Informatica and SAP". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Automic Workload Automation, Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch Workload Automation, whereas Stonebranch Universal Automation Center is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation ESP, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch Workload Automation.
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.
