JAMS

No others.

We use Kace also because it has an agent on every machine, so tasks that push out installations tend to go there. I'm not sure if Jams can do that, but if it does it's not clear that it does.

We switched from Automic Automation. JAMS is so much easier to implement, patch, upgrade, and push agents. It takes more steps to conduct activities in JAMS than in UC4.

I had evaluated 2 others in 2010/2011, but I do not remember their names. This was the easier one to work with and had a better looking, sometimes more professional looking UI than what I was evaluating. JAMS was more scaleable and had the ability to make custom interfaces to more systems through Execution Methods that could be tailored.

For us, JAMS has a great balance of price and functionality.

Mainly i've been using SQL Agent jobs in my career. JAMS takes scheduling a bit further. For instance, i would rather not have SQL Server run a job that is performing an SFTP step. Waste of resources and a job like that is well suited for JAMS

Our team vetted a competing software, VisualCron, feedback as follows:
1. Difficult to use.
2. Questionable customer service - Language barrier and did not respond to request for demo video recording.
3. VisualCron seems more powerful but with that it is more difficult to use if you do not wish to do more extensive coding to customise it.

I might've used other scheduling mechanisms (such as in SQL Server), but JAMS, although with more 'moving pieces', is way more flexible.

It has better customer support

JAMS is easier to use, provides more features and was easier to manage form a central location. simple features in JAMS were missing from VisualCron such as a projected daily schedule.
The install setup with a client and agents was better suited for us too

Not Applicable to our Agency/Division.

It's just different. The views are different, how you set it up is different. It's not good or bad, just different. I think JAMS offers more options when it comes to how jobs run. Like you can use sequence, or setup a job to run based on a number of different dependencies.

While VisualCron provided more guardrails and user centric GUI, JAMS had a better resiliency functions with their clustering and service polling and failovers. We tested this and were able to maintain a large library of jobs and data the seamlessly switches between data centers. In addition the open ended nature of some of the job definitions gives us more power to execute more complex workflows or programmatically implement various loops and sequences that wasn't previously possible in VC

VisualCron was unreliable and buggy no matter what version we used, plus did not have DR functionality

As we grew dissatisfied and limited by Windows Task Scheduler, we selected JAMS because a senior Ops employee at the company had used it previously. We didn't do due diligence and run an RFP process against other providers at the time.

So much cheaper and has a much better ROI.

Tidal and Tivoli are great solutions for very large organizations with deep pockets. I have worked with them as an end-user but was not in a position to extend the platforms, so I can't speak to their capability to be extended with custom code as JAMS can with custom execution methods. I selected JAMS due to its cost and flexibility.

I took over JAMS administration and did not evaluate any other products.

JAMS is completely priced and is much easier to implement and configure. Like painting with a wide brush stroke the alerting and job actions are easy to apply. I have used other systems where each action required multiple configuration steps to stop the workflow when a job fails and to provide alerts. With JAMS I have a sound global configuration that keeps me informed of the schedule status.