Automic Continuous Delivery Automation vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Automic Continuous Delivery...
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (17th)
Control-M
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Release Automation category, the mindshare of Automic Continuous Delivery Automation is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 1.3%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Release Automation
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
Process Automation
4.4%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
4.1%
 

Featured Reviews

it_user779229 - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 26, 2017
Reduces our time to market considerably with automated and consistent results
Our most important criteria when selecting a vendor are * the size of the vendor itself * how stable the company is * how long they have been in the market * what product suites they have that can help us achieve our goal at the end of the day. We look for partners, not vendors per se, that can help us implement our vision with us, and that's why we like Automic. I give it a good nine out of 10 at this time. The one piece that I think that could help leverage more of the tool is the scripting language barrier at this time. If that's not there, and some of the pieces that could be delivered faster, it might be adopted more out there in the market. I would suggest look at the complete offering that's out there. I would suggest: Prove it out first with the use case that you have. We were not shy in terms of running some proofs of concept with a couple of big vendors out there, and then making them make the case why their product suits our use case. And don't be shy to restart if there is something that you think is not going right, make sure you fix the problem before it gets too late.
SC
May 23, 2024
Enables us to manage and orchestrate workflows across the enterprise
The user interface has been excellent. It gives the full overview of the tender performance of data across the workflow. It gives insights on the performance and the degree to which the application has been performing for the given period of time The reporting, the dashboards, and the support are all helpful. There's robust support for compliance and governance and ensures we meet the set company policies and our security. It ensures we're following international guidelines on privacy. The solution helps us better our performance. There aren't issues when we need to plug new solutions and out of our DevOps toolchain. It's helped us reduce our CPU consumption. The price has come down and the workflow nature has significantly changed. It's excellent. We've been able to save a lot of money after switching from Broadcom. The solution has helped modernize our business. Our workflow capabilities have changed and the monitoring process has been simplified. Data can be monitored efficiently from the set of a project to the end, across the data system. The system has really simplified the workflows, and we can easily deliver the data outcomes, enhance efficient data workflows, and offer the full performance report based on the load of the workloads that run across the entire flow system. There's proven stability in monitoring. We've used Control-M to manage and orchestrate workflows across the enterprise, including Microsoft Azure. Control-M helped make it simpler to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines across the infrastructure. It's not complex. We can schedule several events and get the best outcome based on the targeted performance. The solution helped consolidate job scheduler tools in our organization. Each department target has a unique report based on the set workflows that is multifactor for various outcomes. It's also helped consolidate job schedulers. Switching to Control-M has helped reduce the total cost of ownership by 60%.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to see which problems have been resolved from deployment."
"It is an umbrella system that allows us to integrate many different systems into our heterogeneous environment."
"Deployment workflow (WF) can be designed this way, so that it is not necessary to provide all applications (systems) artifacts of which an application consists."
"You can design your workflows for your needs."
"It gives us good feedback on visualizations and on how our processes have progressed."
"It can support very complex environments and dependencies."
"The capability to provide visibility to the stakeholders, to management, is the biggest piece that showcases what the solution is about."
"It provides a wonderful user interface which is easy to use."
"I find Control-M for SAP and Control-M for Informatica good. You can connect to the Linux or Windows servers, and you can run multiple jobs."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for."
"It provides a unified view where you can orchestrate and monitor all your application workloads and data pipelines. That's very important because with cloud, software as a service, edge computing, traditional data center, and legacy apps, there are all these environments. If you don't have that single pane of glass or that one place to look at, you're going to invest a lot of time and resources into tracking things down when they go wrong."
"Self Service, BIM features are most valuable. As no need to login to EM client and check the job status."
"The feature we use most in Control-M is related to the file transfer module. It is quite advanced compared to the other tools like Automate, etc. The new version which has come of same MFT has a lot of advanced features which makes it very easy to work with. There is less need for written programs and more GUI-based stuff."
"The most valuable features are the Advanced File Transfer and the manage file transfer. They make transferring files securely seamless. It's very easy to set up, get deployed, and have it transferred to and from vendors. As long as we can get our firewall rules implemented at a decent time, it's very easy and seamless to get important files transferred in a secure manner."
"As soon as you have an issue, a ticket is created and the tech support is quite responsive."
"We have full visibility now."
 

Cons

"If you have a technical problem and need development of the tool, the support team is terrible, because they cannot help with the technical details."
"Not a perfect ten because the user interface is brand new and it needs improvement."
"We hope that we can integrate the new CD Directive into our portfolio, so we can bring the deployment and release management closer together."
"The dashboard should allow you to see the current state of packages in each environment, not only on an individual application basis, but across the entire application platform."
"GUI for mobile phones: Availability to approve and start deployment through mobile phones."
"At the moment, the version that we are using (version 12.0), the environment is complex with multiple installations. Therefore, the monitoring is not scalable, but this should be improved in 12.1 and 12.2."
"One of the biggest features I've been asked by my team to put in there is opening more scripting languages to be part of the platform. There is a little bit of a learning curve in learning how to code some of the workflows in Automic at this time. If widely used languages like Perl and Python were integrated, on top of what's already there, the proprietary language, it would make it easier to on-board new resources."
"There is an issue with the stability in the tool. The process of agent will stop, then the monitoring agent can't be recognized because the process is running, but you can talk with the system."
"I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it."
"We develop software. More frequently, we are working with microservices and APIs, using our integration tool, MuleSoft. While Control-M is really a good tool to integrate with other tools, it is important for them to continue improving their microservices and API."
"With earlier versions, the support was not accurate or delivered in a timely manner. What would happen is that I would be in production mode and I would have an issue and would want to get someone on a call to see what was happening. But they would always say, “Hey, provide the log first and then we'll review and we'll get back to you." I feel that when a customer asks about a production issue, they should jump onto the call to see what is going on, and then collect the logs."
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"We would recommend modernizing the look and feel of Control-M. They also need to move towards more self-service and development in their environment. It's very antiquated."
"Everybody's biggest gripe is the reporting capability option. It is a gripe because there is a lot of information in Control-M, but the solution doesn't have a good reporting tool to extract that information. Now, if you want all that information, you need to rely on another third-party BI tool to extract the information out of Control-M."
"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility."
"Regarding product design and R&D, the DevOps pipeline could be improved with better capabilities and automation. API security and authentication is another area that could use improvement; users must have static credential passwords, which is a security concern."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I can save time and money more quickly."
"If you have a fixed contract, it has limits to spreading out. If you have a flexible enterprise license contract, then you have a lot of scalability for this tool."
"Customers often complain about the price."
"We increased our quality and reduced our time costs."
"This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics."
"In our environment, pricing depends on the total number of maximum jobs that can run, which is fine. Therefore, if the number of jobs increases, then the licensing fees will increase."
"The pricing is reasonable. It's not an exorbitant amount. The licensing is pretty reasonable for the number of jobs that we run."
"It is not bad. The company can afford it, and it pays for itself. We have those jobs running automatically."
"We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."
"We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Release Automation solutions are best for your needs.
792,098 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
36%
Computer Software Company
14%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about Control-M?
First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
The license models are quite good. They provided me with clear visibility about the pricing plan. There is a pricing plan per user or you can buy the perpetual license for data. Currently, we have ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

CA Continuous Delivery Automation, Automic Release Automation, Automic ONE Automation, UC4 Automation Platform
Control M
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BET365, Charter Communications, TASC
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, GitLab, Red Hat and others in Release Automation. Updated: June 2024.
792,098 professionals have used our research since 2012.