We use Automic to coordinate batch processes for Oracle Utilities products like customer care and billing, and work and asset management. It helps us load customer data, meter reads, and process billing. We also use it to make calls to Solar processes and for file transfers across servers.
I like the GUI interface of Automic. We use it to coordinate batch processes and it's beneficial for orchestrating various processes, especially in the context of Oracle Utilities products.
Automic's database structure is not intuitive. When upgrading, the system breaks down frequently and we require a lot of support. More visual aids in the documentation would be helpful.
Probably four or five years, but I started focusing on it more in the last two or three years.
It's pretty stable once you fix the initial issues after deployment.
Scalability is good.
They are good and helpful, but many issues require support tickets due to inadequate documentation.
The pricing has been increasing significantly over the years, raising operational costs instead of reducing them.
We've been looking into other possible replacements because the pricing with Broadcom has increased significantly.
I would rate Automic a six due to its high price and other issues. For new users, I'd advise taking training courses and learning to read log files effectively.
As a former customer, before co-founding a specialist automation consultancy, I used Automic Automation in the banking and financial services sector. However, Automic's versatility extends far beyond finance, as it is employed across numerous sectors, including manufacturing, utilities, pharmaceutical, government, and retail. It's impossible to think of industry where Automic isn't a valuable tool.
When I worked in the banking sector, scalability and low latency were paramount. These factors and the ability to run processes across multiple platforms – from enterprise systems to mainframes and now the cloud – were our primary drivers. Today, customers increasingly seek cloud-ready solutions, and Automic's ability to be hosted on the cloud is a significant advantage. Notably, the SaaS version of Automic is equally powerful (with the same features and functions) as its on-premise counterpart, which is rare in the Workload Automation marketplace. Ultimately, customers demand multi-platform automation solutions capable of handling cloud, enterprise, and sometimes mainframe environments, while delivering scalability and low latency. Automic Automation effectively addresses all these critical requirements.
Most processes automated with Automic are business critical. Maintaining a highly performing, robust and secure Workload Automation infrastructure is critical to any organisations well-being.
Automic's scalable infrastructure is a key differentiator in the market. It offers a comprehensive suite of advanced job types and is a market-leader in this respect. Moreover, its ability to integrate seamlessly with in-house solutions through programmatic and web service interfaces is unparalleled. This flexibility allows for simple and highly complex implementations, depending on organizational needs. While transparency and supportability are essential for any workload solution, Automic's adaptability ensures it can meet diverse requirements.
Automic Automation is instrumental in supporting our growth due to its exceptional architecture. Unlike systems limited by the number or throughput of communication or workload processes, Automic's highly scalable infrastructure eliminates the need to partition it into multiple instances to mitigate latency. This inherent scalability is one of its most significant and compelling advantages.
Managing complex workloads is simplified with Automic Automation, especially now with the added visibility provided by AAI for Automic customers. This enhanced visibility and reporting is easily understandable, eliminating the need for specialized knowledge to interpret the data.
Automic provides excellent visibility and control across our clients' operating platforms. By leveraging the AAI module, we can not only monitor jobs and processes within Automic but also extend our view to external workload tools like Redwood Tidal, IBM IWS and other Broadcom solutions including AutoSys and CA 7, which is particularly beneficial for larger organizations with diverse tooling. Additionally, AAI's advanced analytics and critical path analysis enables proactive SLA managements; identifying and alerting for potential breaches in advance, providing Operations and Support teams with the opportunity to make timely interventions. This extends to modern cloud environments where processes can be tracked from Automic initiation through to platforms like Apache Airflow, eliminating visibility gaps. Furthermore, the ability to monitor processes within applications like SAP sets Broadcom apart by offering a unified view of operations across multiple platforms, applications, and automation engines.
I would give the predictive modelling provided by the AAI module a perfect score. Thank to the substantial R&D time and investment being focused on AAI, it will undoubtedly improve over time. As AAI continues to evolve to meet the ever-changing demands of the field, customer feedback is crucial in this process. As exemplified by the development of Airflow integration which was developed in response to customer needs. Airflow is a perfect example of the increasing number of cloud-based automation technologies operating in silos, which present customers challenge due to a lack of governance and support, compared to more established systems. To address this, we must encourage Broadcom to expand the range of technologies that can be observed and analyzed by AAI.
Predictive modeling is crucial for strategic planning, especially in industries with strict regulatory requirements and tight deadlines, such as banking. Early visibility into service-level agreements is essential to ensure timely market entry or regulatory report submission. Real-life examples demonstrate the value of early warnings in preventing missed deadlines and operational disruptions. Compared to organisations relying on traditional IT Operations methods, users of Broadcom's AAI module gain significant competitive advantage including enhanced efficiencies and minimised risk. For some the primary benefit of AAI is regulatory compliance, but for all customers, optimized processing allows faster time-to-market and increased competitiveness.
The primary benefits of consolidating multiple technology instances into a single, more capable, and scalable one have been increased efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Essentially, we've gotten more value from our technology investment. Additionally, this approach has enhanced configurability, and leverages Automic's market-leading security and user management features. For some customers, these factors have been crucial driving forces, as they can be implemented relatively quickly. Similarly, reporting capabilities are significantly accelerated. While achieving greater sophistication or transparency in workflows might require additional projects or process reengineering, the immediate advantages in reliability, scalability, and security are often substantial.
Migrating a competitive product to a new platform may reduce infrastructure or agent-related failures, but customers often resist changes, insisting on maintaining their existing commands, scripts, and execution methods. This "rubbish in, rubbish out" approach hinders immediate improvement. To achieve substantial benefits, we encourage customers to adopt a holistic view of their workloads, allowing us to optimize processes. For example, we transformed a customer's poorly structured, error-prone script into multiple well-managed jobs with enhanced error handling and visibility. While tools like Automic are helpful, our expertise as a service provider is crucial. As driving a Ferrari requires skill, utilizing advanced technology effectively demands specialized knowledge and governance. So, we would like to emphasize the importance of expert advice and support, regardless of the chosen technology.
Automic Automation always receives high compliance scores and is typically loved by security and compliance departments. Product security is highly configurable, enabling very precise definition of user access, based on each user's roles and responsibilities. Additionally, Service Level Agreements (SLAs) can be set and monitored, using AAI, tracking processes through their critical path across Automic and beyond.
Automic SaaS can dramatically reduce operational costs by eliminating the need for a dedicated team of infrastructure specialists working around the clock. The exact savings will vary depending on the organization's size but will likely be substantial. While it's inappropriate to quantify the savings as a reseller, it's clear that adopting SaaS can lead to significant cost reductions.
Automic Automation helps in automating and orchestrating processes across legacy and modern systems, including cloud environments.
Currently, automated environments span from cloud and enterprise systems to the mainframe. Applications include SAP, other ERP tools, and specific retail integrations like Oracle Retail. However, the extent of automation often varies depending on the customer. Manufacturing clients, for instance, require automation across ordering, parts, and delivery systems. Essentially, Automic manages the production lines of major companies, demonstrating the ubiquitous nature of workload automation across diverse systems and industries.
Thanks to AAI, I consider Automic Automation to be the industry leader in observability.
I have been using Automic Automation since 2007. It is simple to implement.
Broadcom's AAI module offers advanced predictive SLA monitoring and management reporting capabilities, integrating with ServiceNow for alerting and problem resolution. AAI provides critical path analysis and predictive alerts, analyzing and visualizing processes across diverse IT environments, including competitor tools like Redwood Tidal, IBM IWS, BMC Control-M and Apache Airflow and other Broadcom tools including AutoSys and CA7. Providing IT Operations and Support staff with a comprehensive view is particularly beneficial for large organizations, allowing them to monitor processes holistically on a single dashboard. AAI is a critical selling point for Automic, especially for corporations managing complex IT infrastructures resulting from mergers, acquisitions, or global operations.
Another advantage of Automic Automation over competitors lies in its excellent SAP integration. Its ability to seamlessly integrate with SAP systems is a key factor in winning competitive bids, as it offers unmatched flexibility and adaptability.
Automic's programmability allows for the creation of a versatile automation framework, surpassing traditional job scheduling capabilities.
Prioritizing simplicity and user experience, Automic ensures even junior staff can easily understand and operate the system. By enforcing standardized naming conventions and templates, Automic maintains control and clarity, especially in large-scale operations with millions of jobs. Ultimately, Automic's reliability, supportability, and ability to enhance operational efficiency through automation make it a standout choice.
There is little missing from the core Automic product, so I would concentrate on the key point of difference, Broadcom's Automation Analytics & Intelligence (AAI) module. In my view, AAI offers a wonderful opportunity to track processes across automation engines. Further to AAI offering observability of Apache Airflow processes, I also look forward to being able to monitor other (open-source and proprietary cloud computing platform-specific) workflow management platforms. Additionally, I'd like AAI to be able to monitor volume-based SLAs in addition to time-based SLAs.
I have been using Automic Automation for 17 years.
I would rate the stability of Automic Automation ten out of ten.
I would rate the scalability of Automic Automation ten out of ten.
Broadcom's technical support is excellent.
Positive
The initial deployment is straightforward. For smaller customers, it takes days; for others, it takes weeks. It certainly shouldn't take months, especially for new clients. In fact, small to medium-sized businesses should experience minimal disruption. The majority of time should be dedicated to educating the users and ensuring appropriate business practices and policies are established correctly to help make the most of Automic's power to automate processing end-to-end.
Broadcom set the bar very high for their services partners. Partnerships are earned and only a few make the grade. Broadcom Automation Expert Advantage Services Partners and Broadcom Automation Focus Sales Partners have huge experience.
Pricing is competitive compared to other major vendors of market-leading tools. In my experience Broadcom pricing is typically more affordable than their largest rivals.
I would rate Automic Automation ten out of ten.
Broadcom has a positive attitude towards Workload Automation. Broadcom's Workload team exudes a sincere 'can-do' attitute. Customers can quickly access decision-makers, have their concerns heard, and receive timely responses. I see plenty of evidence of significant research and development investment in Workload Automation, making it an excellent time to be a Broadcom customer. They offer strong products and are genuinely committed to customer satisfaction.
Automic SaaS is relatively new to the market, so while most of my customers are exploring it, few are ready to implement it immediately. However, I anticipate that the majority of small to medium-sized businesses will adopt SaaS, and I believe we will be surprised by the number of large corporations that follow suit.
Maintenance is required for on-premise deployment, which typically needs upgrades every two years or so. With the SaaS deployment, however, these updates and improvements are managed by Broadcom.
I recommend Automic Automation. It is particularly well-suited for organizations that are forward-thinking and prioritize technology. I believe that if you were to create an RFP with challenging requirements for vendors, such as the ability to handle complex integrations, dynamic process flows, and Python interactions, Automic Automation would excel. Its strengths are most apparent in organizations with robust technical capabilities, but it can also be used effectively by less technically advanced companies. Ultimately, Automic Automation tends to be favoured when customers demand a high level of technical proficiency from their solutions.
We use Automic to schedule and automate our financial jobs. It is primarily used for our financial processes, such as closing the books at the end of the quarter or year. When closing the books, we need to load the data from one system to the other. The jobs involved in loading the data are automated through Automic. We have more than a thousand critical jobs automated through Automic that vary in complexity from simple to highly complicated.
Some benefits of Automic were immediate. For example, we instantly increased productivity in managing our data workload. It became effortless. While those benefits were immediate, others were long-term benefits.
It enabled us to build more complex workflows and manage all the data loads end to end in Automic, which was not possible before we implemented it. Those kinds of benefits took a bit more time. We began to realize those benefits in around a year because it took time to understand the tool, its features, and what was possible with it.
We can use Automic to manage workloads across multiple operating systems. Our systems are hosted on Windows, Linux, and the cloud. Automic's good log-capturing methodologies help us reduce workload failure rates. Those logs help us do a detailed root cause analysis, preventing those failures in the future. Some of our systems are on AWS, and some are on Azure. Our Automic installation is on Azure, so we operate across multiple cloud environments.
Automic Automation helps free up the bandwidth of our contractors and employees to focus on more important things. Our systems are financial, so they have to abide by SOC compliance, and Automic's controls and logging enable us to maintain SOC compliance.
We have achieved productivity benefits and avoided costs. We could repurpose some of our costs in other areas that we would not have prioritized otherwise.
Our financial processes have stringent requirements, especially during the quarter close and one-time close periods. Any deviation from our SLAs gets escalated, so we must be on top of all our workloads running through Automic. Real-time monitoring is helpful because as soon as the issue occurs, it sends an alert, and we don't waste time not knowing what the issue is. We know what the issue is and take action on it. We can reduce any impact due to the issue.
I like the connectors Automic has provided or the agents that give me the flexibility to connect to various source and target systems. It's pretty easy to manage complex workloads using Automic. Its user interface makes it easier for us to manage.
We can monitor job progress in real time, and the IT teams' visibility into the progress is excellent. In the event of any issues, the error messages that Automic sends help us to debug the problem.
From a features perspective, we still need some agents to connect to specific systems that Automic doesn't have. Expanding their available agents would make the tool more compatible with various systems that other customers may have.
I have used Automic for about eight years.
We've never had a crash or any stability issues. There have been some infrastructure-related issues that caused the server to go down, but Automic has been stable.
I rate Automic nine out of 10 for stability. We have not encountered any use case that we could not automate with Automic. From that perspective, the scalability is good for us. It has been able to meet all our needs.
I rate Automic support nine out of 10. They are responsive and bring a lot of expertise to the table. We have been assigned an account executive, who provides fantastic support.
Positive
Deploying Automic was somewhere in the middle. It wasn't too complicated, but it wasn't a cakewalk. We are on the cloud. We started on-prem, but then as a company strategy, we moved all our applications to the cloud. Automic is also on the cloud.
When we started implementing Atomic, we set a scope to implement Automic over many years, and that scope has gradually increased. In the beginning, it was a four-month project that included all our financial jobs and a solid chunk of jobs that we were trying to accommodate in our topic. After deployment, it's fairly easy to maintain Automic. You just need to do regular patching and updates.
We generally work with IT vendor partners and service companies. The Automic team also collaborated closely with us to ensure they provided their product expertise during our migration to our scheduling tool. Four from my company were on the deployment team.
Before I joined this company, Automic had a contract with its parent company, and their pricing was very competitive. However, when we split into multiple businesses, the contract increased significantly, becoming an expensive tool.
Make sure you understand your licensing requirements and the model that Automic offers. You have to count the nodes and the agents. As a product owner, you should know what your licensing requirement will be based on how Automic does the licensing counts.
I rate Automic Automation nine out of 10. Before deploying Automic, you should ensure your team has developed some technical expertise so that the systems or scope that you identify for Automic automations are feasible with the tools. You should also ensure that the agents are available and that they work with the types of systems you're trying to connect.
We use it to schedule all of our ERP batch jobs. It is over all of our systems, ETL, PeopleSoft, Linux jobs, everything.
These business processes are automated with Automic Complex.
It's super easy to manage complex workloads. It's drag and drop. You can blow it up, export the XML, and print it out. It's probably the easiest tool I've ever used.
It's super easy. It's just permission to look into it. I do it all the time. The administration is easy. You can read logs, run jobs, generate reports, and more. There are many utility jobs that give you the results. It's super easy.
I like that it can modify run controls in PeopleSoft. You can write the code, tell it what to do, and it'll just do it. You can make the code as easy or as complex as you need it to be.
The reporting from the database is okay; I wish it could be better. But overall, it's really easy to use. I can hire a new person and teach them Automic relatively easily. It's an easy application. You can use it without the code and just use the out-of-the-box stuff, like the calendars and variables, without any difficulty.
Just out of the box, it's super easy. When you start adding in the coding, you can make it as complex as you want it to be. We have some goofy things.
The reporting tool could be improved. We can buy an add-on or a license to enhance it. I work for a university with public funds, so we don't get the whole Automic package. We have a piece of it.
If we had the analytics part of it, it would be better. But additional licenses cost a lot of money, and we don't get them. Bigger corporations probably have it and have no issues. But for a small institution with public funds, it's hard to acquire the different pieces of it.
Still, last year, when our contract came due for renewal, my boss had me search for other scheduling platforms. I found that Automic was still lower in cost compared to some other programs.
Other applications charge you based on how many jobs you run. If you run multiple jobs every minute, even if they only run for a minute or a second, you still get charged. So Automic was less expensive than some of the other applications I looked at.
The calendar with the new version is a little bit goofy. It's not as user-friendly as in the older versions. The web client version is a little bit goofy.
That's my biggest issue. I can get past the reporting. If Automic fixes the calendar, I'd be super happy.
I have been using Automic since 2008.
Lagging, crashing and that type of stuff happens once in a while. I don't know if it's Automic or my bandwidth. Is it my internet connection that's causing it, or is it the application? We had an issue when we first went to the latest version, and it ended up being a fix on our web server. We haven't had that issue since.
If I lag, I question whether it's my internet connection or the application, and it seems to be more of my internet connection because nobody else seems to have it at the same time. When they rolled out the hotfix, it resolved it.
Automic performs really well. It's a solid platform. We use it for everything and never have any issues. It doesn't go down. We have a lot of data that goes in 24/7, a lot of student data, real-time data, real-time processing that runs every minute.
We don't ever have any issues. It's pretty consistent. It's one of those applications that does not go down. As for scale, we run about 14,000 jobs. In a month, it's over a million. It's probably small compared to some other companies. We're just a university, but it's a lot of jobs.
I don't have any issues rolling in anything new. From the last thing I heard, we use very little of what we're actually capable of doing. We run a million jobs a month, and that's just a tiny piece of what Automic can do. How much more could it take? I don't know, but I imagine a lot. I know some of the customers that use Automic, and it's impressive.
The quality of the customer service and support depends on who you get. I'd like to comment that their support is fantastic and I have no issues when I contact them but that's not true. It depends on who you get.
When Broadcom acquired Automic, they trained new people and let all the experts go. If you get someone who's just reading off of a knowledge base with absolutely no knowledge, they're just reading to you and sending you a knowledge base article that's not helpful.
If you get someone who knows the system, the coding, the back end, and how it all works, that's more helpful than sending me a knowledge base article I can read offline. It may or may not be helpful. It's similar, but not the exact same.
Neutral
The one I had before was Unicenter. That's really old. That was just awful. The only one I would compare it to is CA7, and Automic is a different platform. It's a whole lot easier.
We have it all puppetized. It's all run through Puppet scripts. Our last upgrade was a lot of work upfront, but future ones will be super easy.
The type of environments that are currently automated include PeopleSoft and Linux. We have ICS, HCM, FIN, ERA, etc. We have eight environments that we automate through Automic.
It is super important that Automic Automation can be used with cloud and on-premises environments. We run stuff in the cloud all the time, and it's easy to customize on our side for on-premises use. We don't use the cloud workload so much.
We are on-premises. We don't use any legacy systems. They've gotten rid of all the legacy stuff.
When we installed the latest version, we needed support because there were some bugs.
We reorg it every week. It's an automated, scheduled process. There is no other maintenance. Once in a while, you have to check your users and make sure that they're removed when someone is terminated or retires. That's not an everyday occurrence. I do it once a quarter. It's behind our firewall. So, if you don't have an AD account, you can't get into Automic. That mitigates security risks.
It's all a one-person job.
I started with it right after they installed it. I was one of the people who got to build everything inside of it from the beginning. The benefits were noticed right away.
The way Automic allows us to monitor and build things, create workflows, and all that, it's really easy to put together. The monitoring, alerting, text messaging, and email alerts when things fail are very efficient.
Even the very first version was super easy to use. With the latest version, they keep adding more features to make it easier, like colors for alerts and different tabs for filtering. The benefits were noticed immediately. People enjoyed working with it because it was fun to use and watch.
We've automated our maintenance windows, reducing our automatic overtime from 14 hours to an average of 51 minutes. That's a huge money saving for my company. We've also automated some business processes.
For example, when common contracts are due, like VMware or other IT applications, we used to manually renegotiate or pay the maintenance fees. We missed a few, and it was a big deal. Now that's all automated.
The biggest time-saver, besides the overtime, is being able to modify run controls in PeopleSoft. Instead of manually updating values, which we do a lot, Automic updates them automatically. We've saved countless hours between my team and the campus users.
We partnered with an email service plugin for Automic. Now, our users upload a spreadsheet, and the backend code processes it to update run controls and calendars and submit jobs automatically. This saves a lot of time and removes the possibility of manual error. When we make manual changes, it has the possibility for error and it removes that.
We've also scaled down our hours of coverage. We used to be staffed 24/7, and now we're staffed 18/5. We use the automation and alerting in Automic, so if something breaks between midnight and 6 AM, it alerts us. We have on-call staff who take care of whatever failed. We have money savings as far as salary goes. We're not staffed as long.
The pricing keeps going up, which is concerning. We're a university dependent on public funds and government funds.
When the price keeps going up, my boss gets antsy. You know, "You better start looking for something different." We did a three-year model on the contract. This is the first time we've done that. We'll see what happens in two years when the price goes up again.
When Broadcom bought it, they changed the yearly increase from 5% to 10%.
Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.
My advice would be to take the online classes. The free online courses are really good and super helpful on how to use the tool. Don't be afraid of it. It will only do what you tell it to do.
I have been dealing with Automic Automation for probably around ten years. I have been both a partner with Automic, with Broadcom and with Autosys.
Automic Automation is a good tool that offers many advantages.
The greatest advantages of Automic Automation over its competitors include scripting capabilities.
The best features of Automic Automation are that we are able to support many endpoints.
Automic Automation's integration with cloud platforms for enhancing operational efficiency is positive, as it has many supported endpoints for cloud applications out of the box.
Intelligent monitoring with Automic Automation has helped in proactive decision making by providing an AI component.
Automic Automation's detailed logging and reporting has assisted with compliance by supporting major authentication systems and security systems.
Automic Automation has some disadvantages; it is more simplified, and sometimes it can be complicated.
The technical support by Automic, provided by Broadcom, is good with the same blocking support.
I have been working at my current company for thirty years.
Automic Automation does not have any major bugs after upgrading; these are pretty common for most software.
I would rate their technical support as an eight. The only thing I would improve is the upgrade process, which could be simplified.
Positive
My name and company name will not be mentioned. The overall rating for Automic Automation is 8 out of 10.
Currently, we support one of the bank's environments, which is highly complex and relies heavily on Automic Automation. This environment is massive, processing billions of batches daily across four environments, each with millions of jobs. We utilize Automic for various tasks, from simple scripting and file transfers to sending data to external parties like Bloomberg and Nets. Given the scale and scope of our operations, we primarily use Automic for most of our business processes.
We struggled with the manual process of loading data into our SQL database. By implementing Automic Automation, we've successfully automated many time-consuming tasks, significantly reducing the potential for human error.
Automic has significantly improved our IT operations by reducing costs and saving time. For example, manually triggering a script at 10 AM required logging into the server and clicking at the exact time, which took at least 15 minutes. Automic automates this, allowing us to schedule scripts without manual intervention. This benefit is magnified when handling thousands of scripts with dependencies, such as script A triggering B, C, D, E, and so on while managing upstream data and multiple file transfers.
Workload automation capabilities are crucial to our operations. While we depend on databases, Windows, and network infrastructure, Automic is a business-critical application supporting our core banking batches. Its importance cannot be overstated; it's essentially the backbone of our bank. As such, any issues with Automic must be prioritized and resolved promptly.
The file transfer feature is the most valuable for process automation, as many organizations rely heavily on data transfer. Consequently, file transfer functionalities are the most frequently utilized within Automic Automation.
Automic Automation struggles with managing external dependencies, limiting its effectiveness. Built as a self-contained system, it relies on internal workflows composed of basic tasks. When external workflows and dependencies are involved, Automic's limitations become apparent. Manual scripting has been necessary to address this, but integrating this functionality directly into Automic would significantly improve its capabilities. For instance, scheduling a job to run after a delay and only if previous batches are complete is currently challenging in Automic. A built-in feature for such dependencies would greatly simplify the process.
We occasionally encounter bugs when applying new agent versions, patches, or updates to Automic. This is problematic because Broadcom, the vendor, should thoroughly test their components before release. Unfortunately, we've experienced instances where bugs have been discovered after deployment, highlighting the need for improved testing practices from Broadcom before making products available to the market.
I have been using Automic Automation for four years.
The new version experienced significant stability issues. While the vendor may share responsibility, our outdated infrastructure, particularly the ten-year-old data, also contributed to the problem. Queries on such old data were time-consuming and impacted tool performance. We identified and addressed our infrastructure shortcomings with the vendor's assistance. Although there were initial challenges, the system is now stable. We continue to work closely with the vendor to maintain optimal performance.
Automic Automation is highly scalable, with thousands of agents deployed as part of our baseline build. Consequently, every server in our large environment hosts a UC4 agent.
We can connect with technical support by submitting a ticket through the portal, and support is prioritized based on the impact on our business. However, in many cases, we have found that the vendor does not provide a thorough root cause analysis. Instead, we often receive generic recommendations to upgrade our systems or infrastructure.
Neutral
I previously used IBM Workload Automation. Both IBM Workload Automation and Automic Automation have their advantages and disadvantages. IBM Workload Automation was capable of handling all external dependency requirements. We have integrated similar capabilities using other methods, but not within Automic. While Automic might be more expensive, the cost depends on the chosen purchase and licensing model, including options like premium support.
I was involved in upgrading Automic Automation from version 12 to 21. This complex process is highly dependent on the environment and requires extensive planning. Before the upgrade, we must reboot all potentially impacted systems, release specific certificates, and upgrade the agent to ensure compatibility with the latest version. Automic release notes, accessible in their documentation, provide crucial information about potential issues and compatibility requirements. While these compatibility metrics should be carefully reviewed, the complexity of the process varies significantly based on the specific environment, ranging from simple to highly intricate.
Four people were involved in the upgrade process, which took 18 hours due to the necessary migration of our large database.
Automic Automation is costly.
I would rate Automic Automation eight out of ten.
We have a team of 31 people who work with Automic Automation.
Our expert team makes maintenance of Automic Automation easy.
I recommend Automic Automation as a powerful tool with solid functionality. It offers numerous options for completing various tasks in multiple ways.
Everything hinges on a solid foundation. Therefore, a dedicated server for Automic Automation is crucial. Sharing a machine with other applications can introduce latency issues. To avoid this, establish a separate machine with its own VLAN and database exclusively for Automic. A dedicated environment ensures optimal performance. However, installing Automic on shared infrastructure is likely to cause problems.
It is an automation tool. We build the workflows and Linux and Windows servers with it, particularly for running client jobs and databases. We use it with a lot of big data ecosystem tools, such as Hadoop or HDFS.
We have automated regular ETL processes such as data transformation. They are loading data into databases and the HDFS file system.
We use it for data transfer jobs between servers. It is being used for SFTP-type jobs, and we run a lot of Python-based things with Automic.
It deals with business-critical processes. It is an important tool for us. For a lot of backend work, we use Automic Automation to run all kinds of jobs. We have some very complex jobs, but we also use it for some basic jobs. It is being used for very critical or high-priority jobs and complicated workflows with hundreds of jobs.
It has been easy for us to manage complex workloads using Automic Automation. The user interface allows us to zoom into a particular section of a complicated workflow. If we have 30 different jobs and scripts tied together in a workflow, we can use the graphical interface to work on one section of the job on our screen. We can also embed one workflow into another. If there is a complicated workflow, we can bunch it all into one workflow and embed that one into a different workflow. This way, we can manage more complicated workflows.
It is easy to use. We previously had a thick client which was Java-based, and now, we have the web-based one. Both have been easy to use. Building jobs and doing the admin side of things, such as monitoring jobs, checking reports of the jobs, and checking job statistics has been easy. It is one of the easy-to-use tools.
We could see its benefits immediately after deploying it. We were replacing a legacy tool with Automic. It was a new solution, and we could see all the new features in it.
We have a lot of alerting features and notification features. It even has a feature to notify us when a job takes longer than usual. If our workflow usually takes two hours to run, but it is taking longer, Automic Automation can notify us. It helps to reduce the error or failure rates.
Automic Automation has freed up staff to do other things more. By automating routine things with Automic, they can move on to doing other things. It surely frees up people's time. It is saving time for our staff.
Automic Automation helped reduce our operational costs. We used to get called often with our old tool because of more failure rates, agents going down, etc. In that sense, it is saving time for staff. If more tickets are generated, we would have to hire more people offshore. With fewer tickers and fewer job failures, we need fewer people.
Automic Automation has helped improve our ability to meet SLAs by being more reliable and more stable. It is a stable tool. Our jobs are not failing because technology is failing or agents are going down or not responding.
Since we bought it, we have not had any big issues. We are satisfied with it. We are able to run multiple jobs. We can build and run complicated jobs. There are no issues. The user interface and other things are easy to use, and people are generally happy with the tool.
We use Automic for both legacy and modern systems. We have automated Linux workflows, shell scripts, database jobs, and big data jobs such as HDFS jobs and Spark jobs.
Integration with the cloud is an area for improvement. They have to make it somehow fit or usable for cloud use cases. Right now, it works great for our on-prem data center, but they have to come up with a very good reason why people should be using it in the cloud.
We got the tool in 2015, so it has been nine years.
It is stable. We have not had any issues related to stability.
It is scalable. We only have a two-server cluster. We never had a need for more than that. We have the licenses to add more servers in case we need more throughput from Automic.
I have interacted with them a lot of times. They can be better, but overall, they are okay. If we have a severe or high-priority issue where we need help immediately, we get very experienced engineers, but if it is a routine issue, there are a lot of emails back and forth. So, for low-priority issues, there can be some improvement.
Neutral
We used to use a tool called Redwood Cronacle previously. We got separated from our parent company, and our managers had more autonomy to select the tech stack and switch to a different technology.
So, we had an old tool before, and we wanted to replace it. Back in 2015 or 2016, when Atomic was selected as a vendor, we were looking at all the features, the integrations with HDFS, and the agent architecture they have. We were also looking for the stability of the tool. With the previous tool, we had a lot of stability issues, such as agents going off, so we were looking for a more stable tool. We also wanted to have a more modern tool.
Given the number of jobs we had, it took us a long time to move to it, but we expected that. We were able to do it within the allotted time. In that sense, we did not have any unforeseen issues when we moved to Automic Automation.
Given that we had hundreds or thousands of jobs, it took us about six months to complete the move. We totally deprecated our old tool and moved 100% of our jobs to Automic Automation.
It does not require anything big in terms of maintenance. It just requires upgrades. Other than that, there is nothing. The platform is stable.
They have increased the license price a little bit. It is more than what we expected about two years ago. So, there could be some surprises when it comes to pricing.
It is an easy-to-use tool. You do not have to spend too much time learning the interface and other things. It is a stable tool. It is reliable.
We have not used the predictive modeling provided by the AAI capability. We tried it for a while, but we did not have any advanced use cases where we had to dig deep into the system. We have some basic reports, and people seem to be happy with that.
We predominantly use it for on-prem jobs. We never tested it on the cloud. It seems complicated. It needs a lot of setup such as opening the network and the network's firewalls and other things. It seems difficult. We may also need a different type of licensing to run from the agents in the cloud, so we did not try it. In the future, we may use Automic Automation with the cloud.
I would rate Automic Automation a nine out of ten.
We have many different use cases. One use case is to back up all our servers. This is a big usage. The next one is to schedule things on SAP systems. We have SAP reports. We have processes where different SAP systems are involved and we can build up dependencies. We create business process flows. This is a big use case.
We use Automic Automation for managing databases, such as SQL databases, Oracle databases, and SAP databases. We have customers who use UC4 for general monitoring, system jobs, and other things. These are the main use cases.
We have some business-critical processes. For example, if a file is there, then the file has to be loaded to SAP. The customers can then, for example, print the papers to transport the goods. If our UC4 process does not happen, the papers cannot be printed and the goods cannot be shipped to a customer.
Some departments use it to handle the databases. If the process is stuck, then perhaps for Oracle databases, the archive files will not be moved to another folder, and the folder will grow and grow. There would be no space on the file system, and the application that is using the database cannot work anymore. We have some very critical processes and also many processes that are not so critical.
The biggest benefit is that we have one point of view on the processes. We can build dependencies, and we can have access to different platforms. We can integrate different platforms. This is the biggest benefit of Automic Automation.
Our systems are very big. At times, we have more than 11 million jobs per day or executions per day, and we have struggled with this amount in the past, but Broadcom has improved the application so that we can avoid such struggles. We have a big environment. When new functionality is implemented in the system, very often, we are the first ones to struggle with something, and then Broadcom has to improve it. Normally, it is a very stable product for us.
We have some very big workflows, which include more than a thousand objects, so it can be very hard for us to have a good overview of it all. That is why we build our processes in small steps. This way, it is much easier to handle them as one very big workflow. This is our experience, and we try to go in this direction.
We have the agent, or we can use the REST API. It is easy to implement in the end. The big challenge is that if you have many components in your systems, you have to update the components from time to time, and this, of course, is a big effort.
Automic Automation has saved time and helped free up staff for other projects or tasks. We automate many things with Automic Automation. If we had to do these things every day manually, we would lose a lot of time. It helps us save time for other projects.
Automic Automation has helped us reduce our operational costs. I am from the admin team, and we have to roll out the new version of our agent. We have more than 30,000 agents in our system. To update each agent manually, we would have to log onto the server, move the binaries to the target system, stop the agent, and start the agent. It would take a very long time to do this manually for 30,000 agents. With Automic Automation, we have the possibility to just say that we want to update this agent. The binaries will be moved to the platform, and the agent will be stopped and started automatically. We do not have to log in to the servers. It will be done in the background. Therefore, it is a big help for us in saving time.
It has so many possibilities, and many functions are important for us. We use it very often, so it is difficult to say which is the best one. In general, the complete functionality that Broadcom offers is very good. It is very flexible in terms of using the functionalities and build processes. The biggest benefit perhaps is that we have so many possibilities in UC4 or Automic Automation to reach the target. We can more or less build each requirement from our customers.
The visibility and control that Automic Automation provides are good, but it could be improved. In case we run into performance issues, it is sometimes hard to find out what is the real cause for it.
At the moment, the REST interface does not include everything. It was improved a little bit, but some functionality is still open. This is something that can be improved. There is nothing critical that is missing for that we cannot use Automic Automation.
I have been using this solution for more than 25 years.
I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.
It is easy to scale, but the database should support that scalability. We can scale processes, and it is easy, but in the end, the database must be able to handle that. We sometimes struggle a little bit there.
In our experience, when we want to scale, we do, but we then see some negative side effects, and we have to go down again. We have to contact the support. In most cases, we need a patch.
Some errors are checked directly if you create an object, and for some errors, it is always best if Broadcom checks whether it fits or not, but, of course, not all of them can be done in this way. If we run into an error that we cannot solve immediately at our end, we have the possibility to create a support ticket. We have the possibility to specify the priority one, two, three, or four. If it is priority one, we normally get very fast support on the phone, and they help. If it is a normal error, a ticket is created, but it takes time to get a solution, which is okay.
I have good experience with technical support. We also have a TSE partner. If we have some problems, we can contact this colleague directly. That makes life very easy.
Positive
In the mainframe environment, we had our own solution, but it was a long time ago. It is not comparable with Automic Automation.
We are not using cloud environments at the moment. We work only with on-premises environments. We have databases. At the moment, we are focusing on on-prem because most of the automations are still on-prem. I guess it will change in the future, but I do not see the change to the cloud environment happening in the next two years.
I have not practiced the deployment process, but I know that we could support some of our customers. They really benefited because of this.
In terms of maintenance, maintaining the processes is easy, but before we roll out a new version, we have to test all the things. This is a big effort for us every time. We struggle every time a new functionality is implemented because in most cases, the product is tested in a smaller environment, and it works. However, we usually reach the limit and then we have to adapt the product. We have to get in touch with Broadcom for that. Before we can roll out a new version, we have to test it properly. This is a big challenge on our end. If you are a customer with a small environment, it is easier to install the application because you have not adapted many things. You can more or less use it as you installed it, but in a bigger environment, you have many adaptations.
We have our TSE as the contact person.
We do an evaluation from time to time. We check out the market from time to time to see if there is perhaps a better product, but at the moment, we are concentrating on this solution.
I could recommend Automic Automation, but it is a bit challenging if you want to implement it in a very big environment. If it is a small environment, it can easily handle that.
I would rate Automic Automation a nine out of ten.
We can automate nearly all business processes except for real-time processes using Automic Automation.
Ten years ago, I was first introduced to Automic Automation during a migration project for a major bank. Their legacy system lacked SAP integration, which Automic Automation provided, necessitating the switch.
Our customers utilize Automic Automation in a hybrid environment that encompasses both on-premises and cloud-based infrastructures.
Overall, Automic Automation offers excellent functionality and is an outstanding product in the market. Despite its limitations, it remains one of the best options available. While scripting languages can be used to implement special functionality, this approach is outdated. For more modern and efficient implementation, Python or custom scripting languages tailored to specific workflows are preferable.
Reducing job and workload failure rates across multiple cloud environments is of utmost importance. Workflows and workload engines are vital components for a wide range of processes, not only in business and IT but also in healthcare. Managing resource-intensive workflow engineering businesses also necessitates effective workflow automation. In technical settings, such as clinics, workflows, and processes can be automated using virtual engines. We are at the early stages of these developments, and a unified approach between business, IT, and technical teams is crucial for success. Two key considerations are the flow and dependencies between activities, and the bulk load management, which involves controlling resource consumption.
Automic Automation has been instrumental in enhancing our compliance processes. The software effectively automates multi-step processes, making them more efficient and streamlined. Compliance processes are particularly well-suited for redesign and segmentation into smaller components. While compliance processes share similarities with other processes, such as login procedures, they hold a unique importance akin to security. Virtual engines have the potential to automate and control a wide range of processes, including security, compliance, and even genetic analysis. However, their implementation in these areas is still in its early stages. Additionally, virtual engines can facilitate complex workflows, such as channel analysis.
With Automic Automation for traditional IT, achieving SLAs is assured. This is because we maintain complete control over our workflow. When an issue arises, we can quickly pinpoint the cause, whether it's a failed job or another factor. Event processing provides similar visibility, offering an alternative perspective on the situation. While some advocate for workflows as the primary means of SLA fulfillment, this approach is not entirely comprehensive. The most effective strategy for achieving SLAs involves a combination of event management and ITSM infrastructure.
Automic Automation is a highly complex yet versatile tool.
Due to Automic Automation's proprietary scripting language, upgrading it can be extremely challenging, unlike other workflow automation products that offer seamless migration. This inflexibility makes Automic Automation the most complex and restrictive solution in the market. Choosing Automic Automation essentially locks us into their ecosystem, making it nearly impossible to switch to a different product. Therefore, I strongly advise against using Automic Automation.
Automic Automation's AI capabilities are limited. Most traditional workflow products lack robust support for AI workflows. Airflow might be a suitable option for AI workflows. However, if real-time AI processing is required, a different product altogether is necessary. For example, in the field of genetics, if a workflow involves thousands of jobs, traditional workflow products such as Automic Automation may struggle to handle such a large workload. The maximum capacity of these products might be around 1,000 or 2,000 jobs. In contrast, a genetic workflow could involve up to 100,000 jobs, requiring a completely different workflow product specifically designed for such large-scale processing.
Mainstream workflow products like Automic Automation offer similar functionalities and are widely used around the globe. These products typically check for process completion every second. However, in high-performance computing and emerging fields like medicine or ophthalmology, we need to control thousands of jobs simultaneously, requiring millisecond-level process completion checks. To achieve this, we can store event data in databases or perform on-the-fly checks. Additionally, we need to integrate workflow control with workload management to prevent machine overload. These requirements make it unsuitable for tasks like controlling genomic workflows.
I have been using Automic Automation for over ten years.
Automic Automation's technical support, like that of many other companies, is inadequate due to their outsourcing practices. In an effort to cut costs, they relocated their support staff to India. The best technical support I've ever received came from Israel. Many Israeli products, such as those from Mellanox, exude a similar level of quality. Mellanox, now owned by NVIDIA, resolved complex issues for me within a couple of days. When I encountered problems with Cisco switches, it took weeks to find a solution. I had to communicate with someone in India, then return to development, and so on. It's preferable to avoid discussing this issue altogether. It's a common problem among IT companies. They want to transfer their first and second-level support to India, with third-level support potentially remaining in the United States or near the product's development location. In general, I would advise disregarding support that lacks engineering expertise. They are incapable of resolving any issues.
The installation of Automic Automation is complex due to the lack of full automation in both the installation and distribution processes.
The pricing of Automic Automation varies depending on the specific contract terms. While one of our customers in the banking industry has secured a favorable contract with Automic Automation compared to other scheduling solutions, new contracts for Automic Automation tend to be on the higher end of the pricing spectrum.
I would rate Automic Automation nine out of ten. The product is very good, but I would not buy it because I would be too limited by the scripting language. I would be locked into using this vendor indefinitely, potentially for the next two hundred years.
Two of our customers are still using Automic Automation because it is too complex and expensive to migrate over to another solution. The main problem is the script language. In order to migrate, the entire workflow would need to be redesigned.
Automic Automation provides exceptional visibility and control across internal operating platforms. Its scripting language offers remarkable flexibility. However, due to vendor lock-in, I would not recommend its adoption. Automic's inability to support migration to other vendors presents a significant drawback. Although the product boasts a wide range of features and is currently undergoing improvement, its inflexibility in terms of migration remains a major concern. For new projects, I would recommend considering alternative solutions such as Control-M or Tivoli, which offer greater flexibility and easier migration capabilities.
While supporting multiple platforms is a common feature among mainstream schedulers, Automic Automation's ability to do so is not a significant differentiator. Even the most widely used schedulers can encounter challenges with Windows, but we can devise a solution to address these issues.
Encompassing all environments, the customer aims to automate their IT infrastructure, virtual systems, and all processing operations. This automation spans from mainframe legacy systems to current Unix and Linux environments. A workflow system will be employed to automate critical processes.
The necessity of utilizing Automic Automation on both cloud and on-premises environments is contingent upon specific customer requirements. While some organizations, particularly those in the government and financial sectors, may prefer an on-premises approach, others may embrace cloud-based solutions or a hybrid model that integrates both cloud and on-premises infrastructure.
As we strive for a comprehensive automation solution, the ability to monitor automation across multiple environments becomes increasingly intricate. This poses a significant challenge, prompting traditional automation products like Ansible and Terraform to incorporate workflow capabilities. For instance, IBM has integrated workflows into Ansible, necessitating the use of a database to store these web flows. To illustrate, IBM enhanced Ansible by incorporating a workflow engine and a database. Similarly, other automation products such as Terraform and others are adopting similar strategies, integrating virtual engines within their products.
Every workflow product requires maintenance.
Automic Automation aims to expand into AI and other emerging fields in the future. However, current limitations hinder their progress. Instead of pursuing these advancements, they should focus on developing new products for AI, genomics, and HPC. These new solutions could potentially replace mainstream schedulers for traditional applications like SAP, Informatica, Automic, and Control-M. While Automic Automation remains a viable solution for existing applications, alternative products are better suited for emerging technologies.
We use the solution across every business area for site switches, backups, batch scheduling, and other tasks.
We implemented the solution about 20 years ago when we switched from our legacy mainframe systems. We were looking for a scheduler to replace the one in our new SAP systems, as the SAP system scheduler wasn't considered robust enough. The solution was chosen to replace SAP scheduling at that time.
What I like most about Automic Automation is its flexibility to work across multiple platforms, such as Windows, Linux, and SAP environments. The ease of switching from one environment to another is particularly useful. I like its calendars and workflows.
The support has declined somewhat over the years due to various takeovers. It's not as personal as it used to be.
I've been using Automic Automation since 2005 for about 19 years.
I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten.
I wouldn't rate the solution's scalability highly, but that's more due to our company's structure than its capabilities. We often don't know what's coming for our company in advance, so we might not always consider using it for new projects even though we probably could.
We initially bought it for SAP scheduling but soon found it could do many other things. For example, we use it for site switches between our two data centers, testing our critical systems once or twice a year. In the first two years of using it, our usage grew by about 400%.
Currently, we have about 400 agents and three environments: development, test, and production. We have approximately 150 users.
As for scalability, we currently only use about 20% of the CPU capacity, so there's plenty of room for growth. If we need to add more jobs or increase the workload, it's scalable. Increasing memory, disk space, or servers is also easy.
Before Automic Automation, we used a solution called ControlM, though I wasn't with the company then.
The deployment of Automic Automation was fairly straightforward, though we initially had a few minor issues. It took about a year before it went live, and only three or four people were involved in the process.
The solution does require daily maintenance, which mostly involves looking at the database and archiving older data to keep it efficient.
We've seen a return on investment, particularly in terms of resources. For example, when we have an outage for an upgrade, the manual implications would be vast without Automic Automation. If we were to ask everyone to do the tasks it does manually, we would need a lot more people.
The solution seems expensive to me, but it does the job well.
We did face some challenges during the early implementation about 17 years ago. There were occasions when jobs replicated themselves and filled up the database, causing system downtime. However, we've since fixed these issues.
I would recommend Automic Automation to other users mainly because of its ability to work in multiple platform environments. For example, it's effortless to move files from a Windows system to a Linux system.
Overall, I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I think it's a very good product.
