|
Research Report - End-User: Workload Automation Q1 2010 – An EMA Radar Report™
|
 Author:EMA Staff Other Contributor: EMA Staff |
|||||
Abstract: Contributing Author: Liam McGlynn Workload Automation (WLA), the natural maturation of Job Scheduling to enable broader IT Service Management, is not the sexiest technology in the data center, but few can argue the degree to which other technologies and business objectives depend upon WLA. Unfortunately, most enterprises are poorly positioned to exploit WLA for its layered advantages and, as a result, will endure longer and more frequent outages in combination with unnecessary resource inefficiency. A strategic, modular, and comprehensive WLA implementation delivers rapid ROI and enables broader IT optimization that supports business objectives. This EMA Radar Report™ for Workload Automation provides enterprise readers with a starting point from which to evaluate available WLA solutions. EMA analysts combined a detailed feature-function survey with a deep investigation into each solution’s architecture, deployment, usability, vendor strength, product pricing and more, to provide a basis for evaluation. Added to this are the expert insights and opinions of experienced EMA analysts. This report also provides a maturity model that explains the progression from chaotic batch job scheduling to dynamic and adaptive WLA. Vendors evaluated include: Arcana, Advanced Systems Concepts (ActiveBatch), ASG (Zeke, Zena, OpsCentral), BMC Software (CONTROL-M), CA (CA 7, CA Scheduler, CA AutoSys, CA ESP, CA Jobtrac, CA NSM) , IBM (Tivoli Workload Automation, Tivoli Workload Scheduler), Opswise, ORSYP (Dollar Universe), ROC Maestro, SMA (OpCon/xps) Stonebranch (Indesca), Cisco (Tidal Enterprise Scheduler), and UC4 (V8 Automation Engine). |
|
|||||||
