Control-M SaaS

What do you like best about the product?

Integration with multi cloud platform and a number of different applications which gives a centralized view of entire workflows.

What do you dislike about the product?

- Their inability to support scheduling Legacy app servers.
- Pricing is on a higher side.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

- Helps maintain SLA for workflows.
- Helps identify the issues more quickly.
- Proactive alerts for Critical batch chains.

What do you like best about the product?

I like Control-M's ability for Hybrid Multicloud orchestration, which helps in managing a mix of old mainframes and modern cloud infrastructure within our bank. The Job As Code feature is beneficial as well. The Centralized Visibility and Auditing capabilities are also valuable, providing a centralized place to connect our systems, audit, monitor, and execute tasks effectively.

What do you dislike about the product?

It's quite complex at the learning stage, especially for beginners. Also, the cost is high. If I have a chance to improve it, my focus would be first on the native reporting tool, which definitely needs some enhancements.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

I use Control-M to reduce manual effort, system overload, downtime, and high operational cost. It centralizes job scheduling, provides hybrid multicloud orchestration, and offers centralized visibility and auditing, connecting our old and new IT infrastructures efficiently.

What do you like best about the product?

I like the user interfaces of Control-M, both the FAT Client and the Web UI. I appreciate that Control-M provides a lot of integrations by BMC, and I also like having the ability to create my own integrations using the Application Integrator.

What do you dislike about the product?

Sometimes it would be nice to have an integration provided by BMC. Or the integrations that are provided should have more functionalities. The Workload Archiver of Control-M could be improved by including more log information and keeping the logs revision-compliant. The MFT/E part of Control-M is missing a high-availability solution and a lot of modern MFT-functions. There could be improvements in regards to system requirements.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

Control-M solves gaps between different applications, databases, and file transfers.

Control-M  is used for scheduling, specifically scheduling application jobs. We have always been using Control-M , as we inherited it. We work with all technologies within the business using Control-M, including WebMethods, Axway, and IBM MQ . In the managed file transfer space, using Control-M, I find that it is not as user-friendly as other products available for MFT .

The best features in Control-M are its ease of use and robustness; it is very feature-rich, which is what we use it for—scheduling. It is easy to integrate Control-M with technologies for our DataOps and DevOps processes as things change. The integration aspects of Control-M are out of the box, so they are straightforward to use. From using Control-M, I have seen improvements as they grow with the versions; with the newer versions come enhanced functionalities, such as the latest version allowing access through a web GUI instead of the client GUI that you have to install, which is quite helpful because you can access it from anywhere.

We are not on the latest version of Control-M; we currently have version 20 and 21.

I have been using Control-M for 10 years.

Regarding stability with Control-M, I would rate it nine out of ten for downtime, bugs, and glitches.

Control-M is very scalable, and I would rate it a nine.

I would rate the vendor's technical support for Control-M as a nine.

Positive

We have tried to look at other products, but there is no other product out there that does what it needs to do as Control-M does, which is why it is still around—it simply does what it needs to do.

The deployment of Control-M was quite complex to get in, but once it is in, it does what it needs to do. It took weeks to get Control-M deployed.

Control-M requires maintenance from our end, as we have to perform patching whenever needed, but that does not happen very often—probably once a quarter. Patching for Control-M is easy.

I have definitely seen a return on investment with Control-M in terms of time and resources, but I cannot speak to the financial aspect—I do not know. I would estimate that I have saved perhaps 20% to 30% on time and resources using Control-M.

From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you get; you are paying for a premium product.

We looked at AWS  products for scheduling with Control-M; I cannot remember the actual name of the scheduling tool at AWS , but it is nowhere near as advanced as what we need.

Approximately 100 users work with Control-M. They are not all Australia-based; some users are from India, so we have offshore resources as well. My relationship with BMC is both transformative and transactional. Regarding the transformative aspect, I have impressions of BMC as both because we partner with them; we might not be strategic partners, but we value their advice all the time—not just product advice, but sales as well. We consider ourselves a partner with the vendor, but I do not know if we are officially a signed partner; we are a partner at the base level. When I refer to our relationship with the vendor, we are considered an entry level partner; we are not a reseller, so we cannot resell their products, but we are partners and we consult while using their products internally and with customers to support their customer base. Our clients are generally enterprise businesses. I would recommend Control-M to other users; I know they are going all web-based, which they believe is the best way to go, but I can tell you that everybody I have spoken to has said the contrary—they actually prefer the client GUI that you can install, which is easier to use and more feature-rich, while the web GUI is very hard and difficult to navigate through. I have rated this review a nine out of ten overall.

Hybrid Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

What do you like best about the product?

Below are some points I like in Control-M :-
1, Jobs as a code for Devops
2.Robust Monitoring and SLA Management .
3.Security and Compliances .
4.Cros Platform Support

What do you dislike about the product?

Below are some points I dislike in Control-M :-
1.High Licensing Cost .
2.Complexity on Setup .
3.Outdated GUI .
4.Advance File Transfer Limitation .

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

1. Complex Workflows Orchestration Acros Hybrid Environment .
2.SLA Compliance and Risk Business Disruption .
3.Devops Integration Challenges .
4.Opeartional Inefficiency and Resource Waste .