We performed a comparison between Rocket Zena and UiPath Orchestrator 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."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 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."
"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."
"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."
"I have used other tools with similar capabilities; it's the ease of use."
"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."
"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."
"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."
"The platform serves as a valuable tool for orchestrating solutions within an organization."
"UiPath Orchestration works effectively in deploying, scheduling, and running automated bots across different environments."
"It allows for the segregation of users, ensuring each user has access to specific environments based on their roles."
"The reporting features are good."
"From what I have seen, it is a reliable tool."
"The monitoring feature stands out as the single most indispensable aspect of UiPath Orchestrator for our automation processes."
"I like UiPath Orchestrator's screen capture feature."
"The logs are the best feature of the solution."
"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 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."
"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."
"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."
"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."
"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."
"In the next release, I would like to have an alert feature to indicate when an agent is down. Rocket Zena is not capable of sending alerts that the agent is down. As of now, you have manually monitor to see when the agent is down."
"The vendor should provide free certification to their partners."
"I had faced issues with passwords and the monitoring feature."
"It's a bit difficult to connect to the licenses."
"UiPath Orchestrator should improve its UI and make it more user-friendly."
"The solution's pricing can be more competitive. Apache is one of the most expensive alternatives in the market. The integration with reporting tools and classic solutions is essential. Having BI integration, Salesforce integration, and robust monitoring and reporting capabilities would enhance the product."
"The product must conduct more promotional activities and webinars."
"Clarity on integrating SQL databases and server configurations would improve implementation processes."
"The product must provide process mining features."
Rocket Zena is ranked 12th in Workload Automation with 9 reviews while UiPath Orchestrator is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. Rocket Zena is rated 8.4, while UiPath Orchestrator is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Rocket Zena writes "A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Orchestrator writes "A user-friendly and reliable tool that is easy to implement". Rocket Zena is most compared with Control-M, Rocket Zeke, IBM Workload Automation, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch by Redwood, whereas UiPath Orchestrator is most compared with Control-M. See our Rocket Zena vs. UiPath Orchestrator 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.
