

Control-M and JAMS both compete in the area of scheduling and automation solutions. Control-M seems to be superior in handling complex environments and integrations, making it ideal for large and diverse operations, whereas JAMS is noted for its cost-effectiveness and user-friendly approach, appealing to those seeking straightforward deployment and management.
Features: Control-M stands out with its ability to manage complex scheduling and automation across diverse environments, robust integration capabilities, and task automation across multiple platforms. JAMS offers more straightforward scheduling, robust job management, and ease of use with its ability to automate file transfers and support various scripting languages.
Room for Improvement: Control-M can improve by expanding its output analysis capabilities with arithmetic operations and regular expressions, enhancing reporting, and addressing performance issues. Pricing remains a barrier for smaller enterprises. JAMS could benefit from enhanced search functions, better exception handling, streamlined web interface, and performance monitoring advancements.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M deployment spans hybrid and on-premises setups, providing extensive support, though perceived as costly with some reports of delay in technical assistance. JAMS facilitates deployment across on-premises and cloud environments, praised for its cost efficiency and easy licensing, though documentation and web interface can improve.
Pricing and ROI: Control-M's higher cost is offset by improved ROI in extensive operations due to enhanced automation and management capabilities. The pricing model is seen as prohibitive for smaller businesses. JAMS offers competitive pricing with simplified licensing, providing a good ROI through reduced costs and scalability, appealing to enterprises needing flexible licensing and deployment.
The main return on investment with Helix Control-M has been a reduction in downtime and minimization of manual interventions, which has improved our operational efficiency.
You can run a million batch jobs or tasks at night when all of your highly skilled people are at home sleeping.
By implementing automation tools, you can minimize human errors and improve efficiency.
The design of JAMS makes it very easy to copy jobs and make minimal changes while ensuring functionality.
They quickly evolve with changing technology trends, easily adopt new features, and incorporate them into the product.
The support is accurate, and BMC is always ready to help with queries and complex incidents.
The technical support is very polite, helpful, and available 24/7.
Their response is prompt, exemplifying how support should be.
They are very quick to respond depending on the issue's severity.
We contacted JAMS vendor, who guided us through the necessary steps, and after following their guidance, everything was resolved.
Our license doesn't limit our ability to configure Control-M as needed, allowing us to easily create new agents or environments.
I am paying for a top-end tool which rarely experiences issues, with most problems stemming from the applications being managed rather than the tooling itself.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
We might be underutilizing it, but as more jobs require processing, additional servers would be necessary.
JAMS's scalability is noteworthy; we run 6,000 jobs per day without facing any problems.
Control-M itself is robust, and it would receive a rating of 10.
The downtime is higher compared to AWS.
The testing and development phases need to be more rigorous before releasing patches.
We experience periods of major incidents annually due to capacity constraints, which result in job failures.
Being on the new version, there's been zero downtime.
They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand.
We've experienced main problems with MFTE where having one setup means when an error occurs, the entire service goes down.
Documentation should be maintained for all versions since they provided the application.
Another area for improvement would be the addition of source control for jobs internally, as this feature would solve several problems for me.
A major improvement would be the integration of AI to help us accomplish various tasks.
If around 5,000 or more jobs run at a time, JAMS slows down, and we have to wait around five to 10 minutes or restart JAMS scheduler services.
The licensing cost is very high, and they often consider switching to IBM Workload Scheduler or other options.
Control-M tends to be more expensive compared to other solutions, but users get great value from it.
Control-M is among the highest-priced solutions in the market.
The price is fair considering the functionality and importance of the tool, although the increase did unsettle our management.
Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
The user interface is comprehensive and lets me view all my jobs on one page, monitor everything, and access the job history.
If I have a staff that operates Control-M on Windows Server, they will easily pick it up if they need to run it on Unix or mainframes. It's the same interface, saving time and improving efficiency.
JAMS has positively impacted my organization by completely removing the headache of scheduling jobs, not just for the organization but for all internal operations teams need.
This efficient feature has been invaluable, enabling us to streamline our workflow and enhance productivity.
The most valuable feature of JAMS is its user-friendly interface, especially after upgrading from version six to seven.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Control-M | 14.4% |
| JAMS | 2.8% |
| Other | 82.8% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 37 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 23 |
| Large Enterprise | 143 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 11 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 18 |
Control-M SaaS by BMC is tailored for growing teams, offering essential orchestration for managing hybrid cloud workflows starting at $29,000 annually.
Control-M integrates automation, orchestration, and a user-friendly interface to streamline workflows across banking, DevOps, and cloud environments. Key modules like Managed File Transfer and cross-platform support simplify job monitoring, while Batch Impact Manager enhances scheduling. Despite its capabilities, improvements in output analysis, reporting customization, offline access, and API integration are desired by users.
What are Control-M's key features?Control-M is implemented in industries such as finance and enterprise operations, aiding in automating batch processing across platforms like SAP and Teradata. It integrates with secure file transfers, ERP systems, and databases, whether deployed on-premises or cloud, ensuring seamless operation optimization.
JAMS is an automation and job scheduling solution designed for workflow optimization, catering to businesses large and small with flexible licensing and integration options.
Offering both Core and Advanced packages, JAMS supports a range of environments from small teams to large-scale operations. Its standout features include integration with platforms like PowerShell, SQL, and SAP, coupled with capabilities such as dependency management and natural language scheduling. JAMS simplifies job management, centralizes workflows, and boosts productivity with its robust automation features. Customizable workflows and insightful logging make it adaptable for diverse needs, supported by responsive customer service ensuring seamless operations.
What are JAMS's key features?In industries, JAMS is employed for automating workflows and managing batch jobs. Organizations utilize it for SSIS, SQL Server tasks, file transfers, and integrating with vendor systems, achieving efficient file automation and data management. Scheduler enables precise execution of thousands of tasks daily, enhancing operational efficiency.
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.