We performed a comparison between AWS Step Functions and Rocket Zena based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is stable...The solution is easy to scale."
"One can rate all the calls and that is a good feature."
"It's Amazon, it's scalable."
"It's a general solution that you can adapt to your own needs and is simple to use. We like that it can be integrated with everything in the AWS suite, and that the creation of the pipeline can be done using the graphical user interface."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The integration capability is easy, whereas building state machines is tricky."
"The number of historical events is great."
"What I like the most about Amazon Step Functions is how easy it is to use."
"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."
"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."
"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."
"You can click Ctrl-G and bring a diagram view. You're able to view in a diagram format. The view that it provides is easy, and you can move to the left, up, or down. You can double-click on a certain process. It'll drill into that process and all of its underlying components. You can double-click on an arrow or a component, and it'll bring up a screen that'll have all the variables that are assigned to that particular piece, as well as the values at run time. So, the diagram feature of it, at least for me, is pretty valuable."
"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."
"I have used other tools with similar capabilities; it's the ease of use."
"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."
"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."
"The interface can sometimes feel limited, as we're unable to see what AWS is running behind the scenes."
"Setup took about one day. We had some errors to understand in the beginning, but now everything is working good."
"The pricing of the solution can be improved."
"The solution's pricing could be cheaper. It is cheaper than Airflow."
"The price and support are areas with shortcomings where the solution needs to improve."
"I would like to see more data transformation features in Amazon Step Functions like additional operators and logic."
"The solution's data size limit can be improved."
"It wasn't easy to understand the licensing model. It's like if you use just a little, it's cheap, but it becomes more expensive as you use more. It's like a hook that ties you inside the Amazon ecosystem. So, it creates a dependency."
"In the web interface, it stacks the tasks across the top, and they accumulate until you close or clean those out. That seems a little cumbersome. You must right-click and close all tabs constantly to keep the console clean and manage your views."
"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."
"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."
"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."
"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."
"The documentation has room for improvement."
"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."
"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."
AWS Step Functions is ranked 15th in Workload Automation with 9 reviews while Rocket Zena is ranked 12th in Workload Automation with 9 reviews. AWS Step Functions is rated 7.8, while Rocket Zena is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Step Functions writes "Simplifies complex task automation and enhances development workflows while offering user-friendly interface, seamless scalability and efficient workflow orchestration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rocket Zena writes "A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support". AWS Step Functions is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Apache Airflow, Pega BPM and Oracle BPM, whereas Rocket Zena is most compared with Control-M, Rocket Zeke, IBM Workload Automation, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch by Redwood. See our AWS Step Functions vs. Rocket Zena 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.
