We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Pak for Automation and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I believe two significant features of IBM Cloud Pak for Automation are the focus on SLA management and the capability to handle parallel instances effectively. Parallel instances, for instance, are valuable when dealing with a large number of users, enabling tasks to be performed concurrently for efficient system operation. The SLA aspect is crucial for tracking and ensuring timely completion of tasks. Additionally, the cloud compatibility of IBM BAW allows for seamless migration from on-premises to the cloud. This version also includes a business rule management system for storing and managing business rules effectively."
"What this product allows us to do is to move from on-prem instances where we are running independent instances of FileNet, Datacap, and ODM. It allows us to leverage container-based resiliency and availability modeling so that we have some visibility across the CP4BA ecosystem. We're now migrating all of our data to be in the Cloud Object Storage, and we can now use some of the features of Azure in terms of how we store and retrieve content for our members and our providers."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"It can manage multiple servers and workstations from a single location."
"I believe there is room for improvement in the user interface, particularly in the Process Portal that customers use to view and manage their tasks. The UI of the Process Portal needs enhancement. Additionally, in the next release, I would like to see improved compatibility with Angular, allowing for direct integration with front-end systems. It would be beneficial to have built-in GUI features based on Angular within the system, rather than developing separate applications externally. This, in turn, would provide a more seamless and enhanced front-end experience."
"One of the challenges we're having is finding vendors who have experience in developing on the cloud. We can find developers on the old platform, but it is leading-edge technology. So, we are having some challenges, and IBM is assisting us to find vendor partners. To be able to leverage all the capabilities of the new platform, we have to upgrade our existing ecosystem of FileNet applications. Upgrading to the new platform while trying to modernize is always challenging because it is like you have a moving target."
"The product's management aspect needs enhancement."
"I find the Orchestrator UI to be problematic."
More Microsoft System Center Orchestrator Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is ranked 20th in Process Automation with 2 reviews while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is ranked 21st in Process Automation with 2 reviews. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is rated 8.0, while Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Automation writes "Allows us to leverage container-based resiliency and availability modeling, but we're having challenges in finding vendors who have experience in developing on the cloud". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft System Center Orchestrator writes "Automates tasks and manages multiple servers from a central location ". IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is most compared with IBM BPM, whereas Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is most compared with Camunda, Ivanti Automation, OpenText Operations Orchestration, ServiceNow Orchestration and BizTalk Server. See our IBM Cloud Pak for Automation vs. Microsoft System Center Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
