Control-M from BMC is a platform for integrating, automating, and orchestrating application and data workflows in production across complex hybrid technology ecosystems. It provides deep operational capabilities, delivering speed, scale, security, and governance.
Since IBM Workload Automation isn't compatible with all of our project's operating systems, we've decided to switch to using Control-C instead. Second, the provider provides top-notch customer service in the event of an emergency. Control-M is a lightweight program that places …
We prefer the Control-C over the IBM Workload Automation because it isn't supported on all available OS platforms in our project. Second, we are getting excellent customer support from the vendor in case of any critical issue comes in operations. Control-M is a light weight …
We use a suite of BMC software in which we use Control-M, Remedy, Bladelogic, Patrol/Perform. We selected and trusted them because they have worked so well for many years.
Verified User
Manager
Chose Control-M
Developers are more eager to use Control-M as it has bigger market share.
Manpower Inc. has used Control-M for more than a decade. In the past, Control-M offered broader controls, greater security and multi-system platform integration.
We still use them all depending on which datacenter you refer to. Little Rock is primarily an ASG (ZEKE) user but we also support CA (CA7). New Berlin used CA (ESP) but is in the process of converting over to Control-M as the data center is consolidated into the Milwaukee data …
More robust on all counts. Control-M has more flexibility, interfaces with more products and has the ability to create your own interface to products. The out of the box setup has you up and running on the same day. The ability for the use of agents and executing jobs agentless …
Control-M stacks well above. I definitely know that feature wise, [and based on the] stability of tool plus support in comparison to CA Workload Automation.
We moved from an in-house product to Control-M. Obviously an in-house product is going to be easier to use that something off the shelf because it was written for our environment. The problem was a team of analysts had to be maintained to support it which the company was unable …
The GUI is out-standing, very good compared to TWS or Autosys. It's fast and very reliable. The options such as: Alerts, Notifications, History, Reporting, made us select Control-M and not to forget the pricing, it's very competitive.
I have been using this product for so long and it works so well we have not had the need to evaluate other job schedulers. I have occasionally looked to see what was out there but I have seen anything so far that would require me to go so far as to evaluate the products.
Control-M provides true cross-platform integration without duplication, including service impact management. Control-M provides highly functional file transfer integration including pre and post processing command capabilities and centralised account management.
control-M was the best in class for batch jobs on mainframe and hence went for it - later on it was broadened to work on Unix as well and hence leveraged this functionality
We have had Control-M for over 20 years. At that time, we had been using CA-7 for 10 years and 100% of our production processing involved running batch on IBM-compatible mainframes. We evaluated Control-M, ZEKE, IBM, and one other product. While Control-M was the best of that …
I just started learning and using Skybot just one month month ago, and I see some terminology is similar to Control-V 8, I have worked on v6.3, 6.4 and now 8.
Well can't talk more about the differences but I found one good feature that is notification of calendar expiration, …
TWS was part of our initial proof of concept and product review. Control-M was able to do everything we asked. At the time TWS was unable to provide the interface that we needed. We chose Control-M and have been pleased ever since.
We last reviewed the market in 2001 (schedulers are long-term commitments!) and Control-M edged (by a very narrow margin) the Tivoli alternative, with Dollar Universe (now part of Automic) back in third place. We also tested the Tidal Software scheduler (now part of Cisco) but …