We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and AutoSys Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Automic Workload Automation is highly praised for its robustness, scalability, and implementation simplicity. It provides control over various operating systems and products. AutoSys Workload Automation is valued for its scalability, user-friendly interface, and quick execution.
Automic Workload Automation needs industry-standardization and plug-and-play automation processes, improved language support, better functionality, a user-friendly interface, an enhanced web-based edition, and more competitive pricing. AutoSys Workload Automation users want integration with cloud services, easier reporting and comparison of job performance, better Linux environment integration, improved file transfer job handling, advanced features and functionalities, and the ability to monitor and manage workload windows.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation's customer service has received both positive and negative feedback. Some customers appreciate the prompt response and informative knowledge articles, while others have faced challenges in contacting the support team. AutoSys Workload Automation's customer service is highly acclaimed, with users describing it as excellent, helpful, and responsive. The support team is perceived as competent and equipped.
Ease of Deployment: Automic Workload Automation's setup duration varies from one to five days. AutoSys Workload Automation boasts a quick and uncomplicated setup process, requiring only 10 minutes or less. The simplicity of the setup may be influenced by the user's familiarity and needs.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation offers pricing based on the number of systems being orchestrated, which is considered expensive yet still affordable compared to similar solutions. AutoSys Workload Automation involves a yearly subscription and an annual license, with costs for agents and server setup that can vary.
ROI: There is a lack of ROI information for Automic Workload Automation. AutoSys offers various advantages including heightened productivity, enhanced efficiency, cost savings, improved visibility and control, and decreased downtime. However, the actual ROI may differ depending on factors like company size and workload complexity.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is highly recommended due to its impressive strength, scalability, and effortless implementation. Users appreciate its extensive range of features and intuitive interface. Automic's versatility in managing various operating systems and products is particularly valuable for environments that contain a blend of outdated and modern technologies.
"It works. It does not fail. If something fails, it is not Automic."
"The functionality is great, the scripting language is very powerful. They can adapt to most use cases. Very good community of different companies and a user base so when we have problems we can go to other people."
"The scalability is very good. We can scale it however we want."
"We impose some standards for backup and restore operations."
"The solution helped us fix issues and optimize them. We now run with zero errors."
"Compared to other products, the stability is remarkable."
"I like that Automic Workload Automation has many features compared to other products. There are a lot of good features, and architecture-wise there is a valuable client concept. The architecture and the multi-tenancy is a multi-client concept. That is also useful."
"Both the stability and the scalability of Automic Workload Automation are great."
"It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets."
"We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows."
"I find that it provides better agility in regards to job execution features."
"The features that I have found most valuable with AutoSys are that it is scalable, easy to use, fast, and always available. That's very important because if it's not steady then it's a real problem. So, at this point, we are satisfied with it."
"The CA workload agent has gotten much better. For our organization it's important for us to communicate in a secure fashion between the host and the other platforms, and we are able to do that with our CA product"
"Integration with multiple services and applications across the enterprise."
"To me, what's most valuable in AutoSys Workload Automation is its robustness and quickness. The tool can trigger jobs within a few milliseconds, and it can handle large volumes of jobs."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"An area for improvement would be SQL performance. While tracing SQL traffic, we noticed a lot of commands that cause contention/locks as well as forced waits. The efficiency of the SQL could be greatly improved (in some cases by simply replacing nested Selects and using NOLOCK hints)."
"Its dashboard can be improved. In version 12, they have already moved to a web-based interface from a UI. We are looking into this feature now. We are also looking for available APIs that we can use to interface the engine into our other systems. There should be a subservice facility that we can use to interface with Microsoft Teams and send out authorization on job executions. We have seen a feature like this in other products that we are looking into."
"The pricing has the potential to be high."
"Depending on the properties of the jobs and pre- and post-conditions, there needs to be more flexible and richer conditions that I can check for. This would be a great addition."
"The tool lacks interoperability features."
"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
"I would like more training on workload automation, because I do not have a complete insight of the product yet."
"After the merger, it is getting more American. Now, they do not have support in French and have limited German documentation. This is a critical problem for companies who have older generations who did not have English in school."
"They could do better supporting it. They have too many of the same type of products, so sometimes it doesn't get as much attention as it should."
"The solution could improve by having support for container environments."
"The reporting system, currently, could be better."
"The solution does not have a friendly subscription model because it forces users to take a five-year subscription simultaneously, charging millions of dollars."
"In terms of what should be in the next release, I want integration and AI and so on. I'd like easy reporting where you can compare information, for example, "that job normally takes three minutes and last time it took six minutes or 10 minutes." Then you can get the information to the engineer of which job is taking more time than normal - understanding strange behavior compared to the baseline."
"The WCC could be improved."
"To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with."
"I am not sure whether it is our limitation or a tool limitation because we haven't yet explored it, but whenever we look for different types of reporting, we have some limitations in getting those. It could be because of the way we have set it up internally in our enterprise, but it would be helpful if we can customize the reporting features and some of the alerts that can go out. When we connect enterprise systems, each one looks for a different use case, and if we can get different types of reporting, it will be helpful."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation, AppWorx Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation, whereas AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Stonebranch and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Automic 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.
