Page 1 of 1

Control-M Vs CA Autosys

Posted: 23 Jun 2008 9:40
by kijenketile
I work for a company that is using CA Autosys. We were acquired by them in 2005. We were using Control-M version 6.1.03 for our batch scheduling/Monitoring before we transitioned over to Autosys. I have always felt that Control-M is a more robust, efficient and scalable tool in comparison to Autosys. However, I have just a few things to compare the two tools. I am not sure if any of you have any exposure to Autosys, but I was looking to find out if you are aware of any inadequacies of Autosys that I can incorporate in my list. I am trying to make a presentation to show some of the functionalities of Control-M not avaialble in CA Autosys. Any feedback will be appreciated. Thanks.

Re: Control-M Vs CA Autosys

Posted: 24 Jun 2008 8:34
by Dilbert
Go to BMC page and ask BMC Sales Support abou that?
Once ?ive seen Sales guide and compariosn between CONTROL-M and UC4. Ask BMC Sales if they have anything (white paper, comparison table...) for CONTROL-M and CA.

Posted: 24 Jun 2008 10:26
by fyot

You will find some others informations to compare following that site

Posted: 24 Jun 2008 11:11
by Derick

I've been implementing, supporting and using Control-M for 10 years.

I've also received training on Autosys and did testing on it for comparison between the 2 tools.

I and my colleagues at that time, all came to the same conclusion. Control-M is hands-down the best tool, as matter of fact, because Autosys's user interface, functionality and architecture are so archaic, there is actually no comparison!

Comparing UC4 and AutoSys

Posted: 04 Jun 2010 7:53
by Jayant
Can someone let me know how exactly UC4 compares with AutoSys. I had an opportunity to see UC4 working a few days back and it appeared that it has a scripting language of its own that does not seem to exist in autoSys. This is good and bad. Good in the sense that we can perform lot of work using the scripts but bad in the sense that typically it is a scheduling tool and the operations resources are not developers. This will force operations to learn little bit of developers job so from the roles and responsibility perspective it is not good for operations

Since autoSys does not seem to provide scripting this issue does not exist there (to my knowledge)

any comments/opinions?

UC4 Appworx and Autosys

Posted: 12 Jul 2010 10:32
by Indrashish
I have worked on Appworx ( now bought by UC4 systems ) and I would say that the functionalities though lesser are more friendly to use form a Java based GUI rather than from an Autosys Regular command line ( now that we have the WCC and the WCC thin client in its Beta version - 11.3 ) .
I would say that Appworx integrates into the ERP applications a little shabbily and usually there are long PREDWAITS holding up big workstreams .
The regular batch jobs , datawarehousing etc works OK.

Autosys is more robust as it is command line and the end user doesnt have to worry about just another heavy java based application consuming desktop/laptop resources.
Autosys offers more flexibility and varied job types and conditions as well as the interfaces that integrate into ERP's like SAP and PeopleSoft are good . I am not sure of the Oracle APps interfaces and extensions .

The beauty in Appworx was with the ease and comfort on administration from the GUI with just a DBA access and the usage and ease of creation of Subscripted Variables , logins and the beauty of a traditional ROLE BASED ACCESS MODEL .