Automation Anywhere Reviews

It can be used for customer service support, data extraction, data migration, and software installation. There are so many ways that it can be put to use in a business.

I am still learning to develop it both on cloud and on-premises. I am using the community version of the solution. Our subsidiaries are also using this solution. They are still going through some training.

The data capture feature is very valuable. I know there are also some elements where you have to be able to incorporate AI, but I haven't gotten to that level yet.

The data migration could be better.

I have been using this solution for about three months.

The solution is stable.

It's scalable.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I'm happy with the features I've used so far.

The installation is quite straightforward. At first I was having an issue with the password that was supposed to be sent to my email, but then it came in. Aside from that, I didn't have any issues with installing it.

The solution can be installed by yourself.

There is no technical team needed for deployment and maintenance.

I have also looked at UiPath and Blue Prism, but I am very comfortable with Automation Anywhere.

Our primary use cases for Automation Anywhere (AA) are billing, email automation, and ticketing.

Most of the features of Automation Anywhere (AA) are good, but one big feature which I really like is its OCR (optical character recognition) feature.

Another important feature of this solution is how it handles variables, e.g. my engineers don't need to have complete programming expertise, and they don't need to declare variables and get variables captured on the fly.

I also find the accuracy rate of this solution valuable, and I like that it performs better after implementation. Most of the features of this solution are amazing.

Multiple things still need to be improved in Automation Anywhere (AA), and the key thing is its error handling command, though it has come a long way from the previous version. This solution still has a lot to improve on error handling, especially when compared to other platforms that are doing very well.

Another area for improvement is its file handling. Automation Anywhere (AA) now supports automating file-related operations, but that still needs to be improved. We can directly import and do the script, e.g. the script feature is new and is found in the latest version, but still needs a lot of improvement.

An additional feature I'd like to see in this solution is more scripting integration. Integration needs to be fluid, e.g. integration of different items are in the latest version, but it always comes with limitations.

If a more fluid integration can be built into Automation Anywhere (AA), I can go and unpack a project file, open it, then from there, I'll know that we need to extract the data. Currently, the native RPA takes a whole lot of time to open a particular file, then read the data. It's always easier to utilize the data frame, read and slice the data, then take what's next. In that note, we can enable the RPA within itself, e.g. in-house data solution that can be integrated, making it a better solution. There is an integration feature in Automation Anywhere (AA), but it's not that fluid, and it's not easy to integrate. We always have to build something outside and integrate the whole process, and this needs to be improved.

I have experience with Automation Anywhere (AA) within the last 12 months, and I've been leading projects in a product manager capacity. I've worked with this solution for three years, using the previous generation and the latest generation, e.g. the 2019 version. I handled the implementation of the previous version and the transition and migration to the 2019 network.

Automation Anywhere (AA) has a lot of stability issues. It needs a lot of maintenance. If it runs 24/7 in the server, it's fine, but on the development machines or the VM (virtual machines), it isn't. We really need someone to attend to it, e.g. that person has to monitor the VM, then if an issue starts from the control room, we need to identify what's going on, then we may need to do something to the machine, or to the application. This is a problem in the previous version and the current version, and this solution hangs at times, for no reason at all.

Automation Anywhere (AA) is scalable, but we have not tried to scale it to a larger instance. The implementations we currently have are on-premises, and our costs are limited. We test if this solution works fine for the demos with clients we have worked with, but on the production side, we haven't tried to scale it for more than 20 or 30, and that's the limit we have.

I've contacted and escalated to the technical support team for this solution multiple times. I would rate them 3.5 out of five. They are quick to give support, but it could vary. Their second level technical support are good, but their first level technical support require a lot more insight into the tool and how they're handling issues.

The initial setup for Automation Anywhere (AA) was straightforward, but the current deployments we are working on are a bit complicated because these are switch solutions, and they are not straightforward.

We have multiple systems communicating with each other, e.g. the SaaS systems we need to interface with, then we have other data that we need to introduce to these systems. Because Automation Anywhere (AA) is an on-premises platform, we are looking into whether implementing or deploying it will be safe, but I believe it is safe. In most cases, when it comes to switch solutions where you want to switch your RPA on top of other automation or other technologies, it can be complicated, depending on the technology you're with. It can be complicated when you want to integrate with other systems.

We're paying for a yearly package for Automation Anywhere (AA). It's not a standard license. It's a license package, e.g. it comes with the fee for automation, or the license for the product, and anything beyond that, we pay a base fee, and whether we utilize it or not, it's paid for, and it has to be allocated. That's the current deal we have. What would be better is for them to have different packages for different types of organization.

As Automation Anywhere (AA) is an RPA platform, we have development users and end users, e.g. we have 14 developers who are working on it, and they are direct developers, then we have six citizen developers from the business side, who are certified and are using this product.

Automation Anywhere (AA) always requires maintenance, so we always need maintenance engineers to monitor the application around the clock. Because of cost implications, most clients don't use cloud solution assets, e.g. they use on-premises, which means a lot of maintenance is required.

My advice for people who want to start working with Automation Anywhere (AA) is to get a certification first, and then they also need to determine their purpose, e.g. what kind of case they want to work with. When their certification is ready, they still need to keep learning, especially when they run into issues. They should always get in touch with the forum, or they should get whatever knowledge or information they can take from their certifiers, or whatever organization they got their certification from. There is a learning curve, and it can either be quick to learn, or hard to learn.

I would rate Automation Anywhere (AA) an eight out of ten.

We are currently using Automation Anywhere for a Master Card customer complaint bot that will log tickets on our top priority websites. When customers complain it can be logged directly or the agent logs it on one of our databases. The bot goes to the database and can pick up the ticket that was logged on a top priority website. It then becomes a role ID number to us for verification that has been locked properly. Third parties can take notes, then once locked, they can give the ticket to us.

We did this procedure manually before the use of Automation Anywhere.

Automation Anywhere is very simple to use. The features are very simple and the application light. Overall I love it.

I have been using Automation Anywhere(AA) for approximately five months.

Automation Anywhere is a very stable solution.

The scalability of Automation Anywhere is perfect.

I am the only one using the solution. However, I am going to create a team that can use it optimally.

The challenge we face is the response time of the Automation Anywhere support teams. They could be quicker to give support. However, the problem could be because of the time difference. When we do get in contact with the support their knowledge is very good.

I have used other BPM solutions previously, such as Optimus.

We decided to take processes away from Optimus and we now are using Automation Anywhere.

The initial implementation of Automation Anywhere regarding the elastic search and database set connection can be a little difficult. However, I am skilled enough to get through it. There were some balancing issues that my other team members had to manage. They are having difficulty in balancing when I checked the architecture properly. We determined later that there was no need for a load balance to be done on the servers. We didn't do any load balancing and then the elastic search was not done.

The first time we did the implementation took us some time because we had to set up the server based on the minimum server requirements that were sent to us. Then we had some load balancing issues which took some days because we did not have all the knowledge.

If we had all the information we would have been able to do it faster. When we were applying the certification to the servers it was a different approach because it's a Java-based solution. In the first instance, we had a challenge doing the implementation. After the initial problems were resolved I did not have any problems implementing Automation Anywhere. It took approximately two hours to get it all done.

The deployments only need approximately five to ten people.

We don't have a lot of processes. If we want to expand we can change the license to allow it. Currently our license, we can only have 10,000 bots, on all processes. If we have approximately 10,000 bot processes on the control we'll be able to manage the processes in the control room. Five and ten people should be able to manage 10,000 bots.

There is an annual license to use the solution.

I would recommend this solution to any organization or individual.

I rate Automation Anywhere an eight out of ten.

We use Automation Anywhere to create robots. Basically, the purpose of this tool is if we have any employee doing daily repetitive work, where he does not have time to work on it but he still has to do it every day, we can automate those kinds of projects by using this tool, and we can reduce the burden on the employee. That is the basic use of the Automation Anywhere tool.

In terms of benefits to our company, with this tool we can release the employee from their routine work so that they can concentrate on their other work, like doing innovative things. They can get rid of the regular, routine work.

The feature of this solution that I like the most is that it is coding free - it is a coding free tool. It does not need much coding at all. For all the activities you just drag and drop. That is the best advantage of this tool.

In terms of what could be improved with Automation Anywhere, there are a few areas. They could improve the environmental stabilizing issues. There are a lot of environmental issues when rolling over from one environment to another, higher environment. This is the one thing they definitely need to look into. 

They also have to look into the document understanding process - the screen scraping of the documents, etc... 

In the next release, I would like to see, as I mentioned, better document understanding and screen scraping. There are a few more activities they have to include, like reading the particular column on the Excel operations. They can increase more activities like that.

Right now, there are a lot of complications and complexities involved when reading Excel - they could make that easier.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for almost two years.

We are not using the latest version. We are using 11.3.

In terms of stability, when rolling from one environment, like the production environment or development into other environments, like mixed environments, the application will not open properly or it may take time to open the application. At that time, the tool is not stabilized. It is not able to wait or capture the proper information and application.

Automation Anywhere is scalable

In our company, there are many developers using it and we rolled out around 149 bots, so I can't say the exact number. Different team members are using this tool, and they benefit from its use. Multi-projects are using this bot every single day.

I have reached out to support. There is a website for all we need. We can raise a ticket and can contact them there.

The initial setup is straightforward. The Automation Anywhere company supported us for the installation process. They are good supporters.

In terms of how long it took, that part will be taken care of by our admin team. We are not part of that process at all.

I am not aware of costs, but for every bot we have a license. That is what I know.

I can recommend Automation Anywhere. 

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would say, given the existing process, Automation Anywhere is a seven. As I suggested, if they improve the stabilizing, the screen scraping, the document understanding and some other activities, then definitely they can go ahead with that tool.

The solution has really changed a lot when it comes from v11 to A360. When it was v11, then it was complete scripting, and it was not the UI, the drag and drop features that the other tools provide. You just drag an activity and drop it. It was actually scripting. So it was relatively difficult to develop a code for someone who is not very familiar with basic coding skills.

There are more valuable features with the updated solution. Now they have both the list view and the flow view. They have increased some features in terms of data types. They now have good usage of the data table and have added variable types. It's convenient.

One area that could be improved with the cloud solution when it comes to A360 is we have seen a certain lag. It's not a very happy tool. There are stability issues, but that is something that they maybe looked at already. They have come up a long way, and they are actually promoting the IQ bot as well. The document OCR/ICR techniques are something they're already working on, so I'm looking forward to that as well. 

As a developer, the biggest con is the lag. It's pretty inconvenient to face that delay in things happening. We come across that pretty often. 

It's not necessarily an added feature that I would be looking for, but in general, as a solution, it could have been easier to use than in the current state. The way the tool has been built, it's not easy to build a solution when it comes to using Excel automation. And it's not that convenient.

I've been working with the solution for a little less than two years.

The code for the solution, once developed, is pretty stable. I would say there is no issue in terms of stability there. It is only the initial accessibility in terms of the build phase where we have seen that issue of the lag.

Scalability is pretty much achievable, and I don't think we have faced any issues. We have had bots earlier. But when it comes to larger processes or where there's a situation where we need to use multiple bots for common processes and things like that, there, I have not been able to use those solutions. I don't work as a developer. I work as a solutions architect and a business analyst, and that is one place where I have felt Automation Anywhere is not that capable.

Customer service is comparable to Power Automate and Microsoft; they are responsive.

The initial setup for cloud-based solutions are all straightforward.

When it comes to pros, the solution is convenient. And now it has both the list view and the flow view in terms of the code. So whether it is a seasoned developer or whether it's a newcomer, they have made it slightly easy. I feel that for a first-timer, Automation Anywhere would be something that is relatively difficult to pick up.

I would rate the solution a six out of ten.

The most valuable feature is the SAP application and the DLLs that Automation Anywhere provides. These DLLs help automate the SAP application. In A360, the latest version of Automation Anywhere, they provide many connectors for the different frameworks, like Office 365 or any other APIs, so those connectors are useful.

They still need to improve the SAP application's ability to use the features it has. For example, we have been using a MetaBot to automate SAP applications. They have given the SAP the ability to command Automation Anywhere itself, but we have encountered some limitations. Microsoft Power Automate has so many connectors, like its connector with Microsoft Office and SharePoint. On the other end, I have found Power Automate to be overpowered compared to Automation Anywhere because they already have so many connectors with Office 365, Teams, and other APIs. There are even more if you consider the cloud flow of Power Automate, so it's easy to get triggered.

Automation Anywhere is not so easy to trigger. For example,  I can create an automation in Power Automate where the user provides input into a form, such as Microsoft Form, and that info gets pulled into SharePoint. In Automation Anywhere, we do not have some trigger like that. We have to keep one bot running 24/7 to get this data into SharePoint. Power Automate does not have anything like scheduling. Whenever you fill out the form, it gets triggered on its own, and the information is saved into SharePoint. So this is an advantage of Power Automate that Automation Anywhere does not have.

Automation Anywhere should add the same feature that Power Automate has, so whenever I create a flow, there is a trigger given by Automation Anywhere. Instead of scheduling that bot on CR, there should be something running in the background constantly, so I do not have to schedule the bot or trigger the bot manually. The trigger should be integrated into Automation Anywhere. Also, if I am creating one variable in one module, I have to make the same variable in another subtask, then I have to create a mapping between those two. If Automation Anywhere were to come out with a feature like Power Automate's environment variables, then that variable could be created globally and used throughout the process. That would be better. 

Another feature I would like to have in Automation Anywhere is "Go To Line." When we are writing the code, it sometimes extends 500 to 600 lines. If I want to go to some line numbers — say, the bot has failed on line number 120 — I have to go manually to line 120. If Automation Anywhere provided something like a "Go To Line" feature, that would be useful for us. For example, if you face an error at line number 500 and your code is 1,000 lines, you have to scroll so far down to get to line number 500. 

Furthermore, in Automation Anywhere, you have to write a DLL separately when you want to have something from a .NET perspective. In UiPath and some other tools, there are direct call functions available. It would be nice if Automation Anywhere came up with something like that, where you can directly have the method called.

I've been using Automation Anywhere for around four years.

Automation Anywhere is quite stable. It has been around for many years now and has undergone several updates.  

To some extent, I can say Automation Anywhere is scalable.

The technical support by Automation Anywhere is quite good. Whenever we have an issue, we create a ticket on the Automation Anywhere support site, and the support from their side is quite extensive.

Setting up Automation Anywhere is a bit complex. When I entered into the RPA industry, Automation Anywhere had just been launched. Automation Anywhere was first released in 2014 or thereabouts, and I started working on it in 2017. I was just a novice when I began my journey with RPA, and it was a whole new concept in my organization as well. When we were setting up the control room server and the client, it was a bit daunting. We had to do so much in the background database and then the client. It is pretty complicated to set up the Automation Anywhere control room and the high availability clusters. 

I'm not too sure about the pricing part, because our organizers handle that. I'm just a developer. We get the software already installed on our machine. 

I would rate Automation Anywhere seven out of 10. It is a simple tool to learn, and with A360, they have gone way beyond. They also have an intelligent bot. However, I would suggest going with Microsoft Power Automate ranter than Automation Anywhere because Power Automate's cloud flow is easier to use. In addition, you can use Power Automate with very minimal coding. With Automation Anywhere, you need extensive knowledge of SQL and .NET. You have to learn so many things before implementing Automation Anywhere. 

I have worked on Automation Anywhere for four years and also UiPath. Between these two, I have found Automation Anywhere easier to work on. Also, it's stable because I have delivered around 20 plus automations on Automation Anywhere to date. Based on my experience, I have found Automation Anywhere to be more stable and accessible. I prefer Automation Anywhere. 

In my previous organization, I had worked on UiPath, but I haven't worked on UiPath much for the last two-plus years. So I only have six to eight months of experience on UiPath. I find the Orchestrator feature quite complex and difficult to understand. When I was working on UiPath, they had just introduced their advanced features in Orchestrator, so I found UiPath much more valuable from the .NET perspective. But if we're talking about how easy it is to program, Automation Anywhere is more straightforward. For the past one or two months, I have started getting my hands on Power Automate. In terms of cloud flows, I find Power Automate more useful. Every tool has its pros and cons. After working on Automation Anywhere for around four years, I do find it easy and scalable. But now, now that I've been introduced to Power Automate, I find that I like it because of built-in connectors and templates.

I have used AA to automate various business processes varying from HR and AR teams to Sales.

Starting with HR, we have automated various processes from auto-downloading the data and uploading it to a database without human intervention, to combining multiple file data into one.

For the AR team, we have automated the process to download data from the server and generate the AR report, then updating the dashboards for senior management.

For Sales, we created a form where the Bid Manager would update pursuit details and the tool would pull that data and then send the request to required teams for SPOC allocation.

For HR, the automated download and upload of data (every half hour) resulted in getting the latest performance data to the BPHRs in real-time, as per their access. This helped in saving the manual effort every time a report is asked for including the downloading and sharing of data, as per the access. This way, the BPHRs would directly log into the dashboard and see the data.

Similar effort savings were recorded in other processes as well. Automation of such tasks helped in clearing the bandwidth of the users and requestors alike and saved a lot of to and fro just asking for the latest data.

Automation also resulted in tracking, analytics, and defining a structure for the processes that would help in faster onboarding and easier handover.

Object cloning, Excel, web recorders, database, if-else, loops, and string are some of the most commonly used commands, by me.

Pulling data from web pages using Object Cloning has been an absolute delight. It is very accurate and runs flawlessly.

Up until v11, the Excel commands were very limited compared to what Excel has to offer. We had to use macros mostly, to cover up the gap and avoid using keystrokes. However, A2019 has Excel Advance, which has a lot more functions and covers that gap significantly. 

We are still exploring all the new features and functions of A2019, but one thing I noticed was that it has introduced variable type. While helpful at certain places, I miss the previous method, where one variable can handle any type include a string, numerical, or boolean value.

If the option were available to use the old generic-style variable type, it would be helpful. Now, I need to create one variable for holding a numerical value and convert it to a string value to display it on a message box, which is a little inconvenient. This is purely based on past experience. Once I get used to it, I might find it better and more convenient.

I have been using Automation Anywhere for the last three years. Started with v10 to exploring vA2019, AA has come a long way with excellent features and updates with A2019.

For the HR process, a macro script was created to download data. But the main requirement was that the screen should be locked. As in the working of the tool should not be visible to people around. Hence, the macro script was not working, on lock screen as expected. This is why we moved to AA.

We able to able to replicate the downloading of files and uploading it to database using object cloning and database functions provided by AA.

Most of our ROIs were calculated based on the FTE hours saved since the teams were internal. for some projects it was around 4 hours weekly to 13 hours weekly for others.

The Sales team would take care about pricing, since other teams were also using AA. Licensing was modified based on the runners needed as per the projects. Number of developer licenses were fixed.

We had somebody to teach us about AA, so we directly started with it.

We are currently working on a vendor bill reconciliation process. It is in production now. We are also working on an incident management process for customer service. Within the customer services, there are four or five different processes that we are working on. All of them are incident management but for different categories at different levels. The next use case that we will be working on is bank reconciliation, and then we are planning to expand into HR for onboarding and recruitment. These are unattended robots. 

We are able to integrate it with other products through APIs, which we may not have thought about. For example, there are some in-house solutions that we have for which we have built APIs, and we're able to integrate those APIs with Automation Anywhere. We didn't expect that we'll be working on that but it happened.

The ease of use for the end user and the very low complexity in trying to build a bot are the big factors for us. We are able to work on a project, identify a use case, come up with a design spec, and execute and build a bot within a span of six to eight weeks. In nine to ten weeks, we are able to go live, which reduced complexity. Once we go live, the user interface and the user experience are extremely good.

Their bot runners could be made to handle multiple payloads at the same time because if I want to run multiple parallel operations, the number of bot runners that I have to buy just keeps increasing. It is adding to the cost. However, there is a possibility that we don't need that many bot runners, and we can run multiple operations in a bot runner. This would be a great addition to have.

I have been using this solution for six months.

You get what you paid for. What it says on the tin is what you'll get inside. As a customer, you will not be disappointed. If you're thinking that you want to build rockets using Automation Anywhere, then you will be disappointed. As long as you know your business needs, the automation that you want to focus on, and you understand the product's functionalities in a good way, you will not be disappointed.

Scalability depends on how many parallel processes you want to run. A bot runner basically runs a bot. How many bots can it run? How many of these need to run in serial? How many of these need to run in parallel? This information will determine how much you have to scale. Now, if you're willing to pay a lot of money and have multiple bot runners, that means for each and every bot runner, you can have multiple processes running at the same time. So, if you are willing to pay, yes, you can scale. It depends on your budget. The product works whether you're on 1 bot or 20 bots. The product just goes off and does its thing. That's not a problem.

If it is 1 bot that you're running once a day at 10:00 in the morning, then you need one bot runner. If you have 20 processes that you're automating and these 20 things have to run throughout the day at different points in time at 10:00, 12:00, or 2:00, you can still run them with one bot runner. In those use cases, scalability is not a problem. Scalability becomes an issue when you have multiple processes. If a reconciliation process needs to run along with the general ledger balancing, month-end closing, and everything else, and all of them need to run at the same time, then you're looking at about 10 bot runners running 10 different bots at the same time. If you're willing to pay, you can get what you want, but it becomes a very expensive affair.

We have 15 to 20 people who are touching the application for various purposes. We have business analysts, developers, testers, and the external implementation team. We also have business users.

I have used both UiPath and BluePrism in my previous organizations. Automation Anywhere gives me the flexibility for both on-prem and SaaS, and the difference is not huge for me in terms of performance, security, and all that stuff. It gives me the flexibility, but honestly, on paper, all these three products pretty much do the same. There is a plus or minus 5% difference here or there, but you'll not go wrong with any of these products.

The initial setup was very straightforward. There are specific things that they ask in terms of the environments that we need to build in our typical Windows server, that is, what kind of memory and what kind of processing capability we require. I can't talk from the SaaS perspective because we have an on-prem deployment, but giving on-prem equipment based on the defined specs is pretty much child's play. There is nothing complex about it. It is very easy for developers who understand the platform. You can quickly roll out something and get it live, but you need to understand a lot of logic and the complexity behind the applications such as ServiceNow, Workday, Salesforce, etc. 

We started off with an implementation partner, and our experience with them was good. They had about three people in their team, and we had our business people who were giving the requirements. We also had our technology people who were basically acting as the bridge between our business people and their developers.

We are expecting a significant ROI by the end of the year. 

From a business angle, understand what is it that you need. Where do you see inefficiencies? If you're going to fix inefficiencies that are going to be fixed as part of a larger company-wide transformation program, then use the transformation program and fix those inefficiencies as part of the existing solution. If you think that that larger transformation program is not going to touch some places or if that larger transformation program will touch some of these inefficient areas but not in the near future, and you want some immediate wins, then going in for an RPA tool is a good decision.

At the end of the day, the business needs to be aligned with why you're making the decision, and where and what is your priority? What is your sense of urgency with respect to the places where you're implementing it. For example, in my office, we are working on customer service. There is a massive transformation program going on right now, but that transformation program is touching sales, marketing, finance, and all those areas. It is not touching customer service at all, but customer service has its own inefficiencies. So, we introduced automation in customer service because it's not being touched by the transformation program, and we don't want to keep waiting to gain the ROI of whatever we can get or the reduced cost we'll get from customer service. For example, if I'm going to implement a massive cloud ERP like Oracle or SAP, then I will fix the process as part of that cloud ERP implementation and not wait for a bot to be developed.

From a technical perspective or an integration perspective, use an API to directly communicate between the apps, if you can. You don't need a bot or an RPA to do what an API can do.

I would rate Automation Anywhere an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for building Solutions involving RPA bots. We have implemented two standalone infrastructures each with A2019.16 Control rooms. 

Multiple Developers are working using the tools and commands in A2019 to create bots that will be deployed for clients to address their business requirements.

The infrastructure is running on the private cloud . 

The control room is running on the latest Windows server and the latest Windows SQL server is running the control room database.

Developers use VMware Virtual desktops to execute their bots. Chrome and IE browsers used by the developers.

Clients approach us to implement Automation Anywhere for three main reasons:

1: FTE reduction
2: Improving AHT 
3: Quick implementation and getting started on their RPA journey.

We have seen AA bringing immense value to the clients once operational. Bot deployment is easy and controlling Access is easy with RBAC with the recent additions. User groups and user management is on par with tools like Blue Prism & UiPath.

From a development perspective, the web-based approach is easy to deploy. The downside is that it is difficult to troubleshoot as logging on to the clients has been reduced.

It's comparatively easy to find developers who are accustomed to working with AA compared to other RPA tools.  

A2019 Control room

1: Single installer for all components and it installs all pre-requisites- Makes life easier as only admin access is required from the IT team to complete the installation
2:RBAC - Each component access can be controlled via Custom roles. I have created roles for developers, schedulers, admin, testers are all in a single control room.
3: Inbuilt credential vault with encryption is easy to implement and manage.
4:Recently included features of adding Security groups from the Active Directory is a lifesaver for the Control room administrator. Users are managed at the AD level with no overhead tasks of CR admin managing users.

A2019 Bot Agent

1: Easily installed but requires admin rights. 
2: It can be installed on a server now as the option to add multiple users is enabled in bot agent installer files

Verbose logging of bot compiling and deployment from the control room. Events occurring during compiling, pre-processing the bots should be logged in the control room or bot launcher logs.

Exported bots packages are not updated. Each package must be validated independently upon being exported from one control room to another.

Moving away from Client-server architecture to web-based deployment compromised developer experience of app reliability offered by 11.3.X flavors.

Desktop app experience >>> Web experience. Developers are not pleased. 

I have been using A2019 for 4 months.

Stick to long term releases.

Easily scalable on-premises.

Customer support is excellent and have helped on multiple occasions.Raising a ticket through through partner/support portal is very easy. Frontline engineers are quick to respond and access the issue mentioned in the ticket.

In my experience , most of the cases are resolved by frontline team and rarely get to involve their escalation team. Case resolution time differ vastly based on the complexity of the issue being reported and availability of the support engineer. 

Getting quick support/response is difficult and most of the calls are pre-scheduled. Categorizing a support ticket is crucial to get right resources for the issue. You will not like a platform engineer supporting a bot development issue and vice versa.

Enhancement requests via support requests are time consuming and might not see daylight till next minor/major upgrade.  

knowledge base articles available for troubleshooting known issues can be improved. Articles are not sorted properly and finding the correct KB for a known issue takes lot of time and effort.

UiPath, we switched due to organizational use.

Simple installation.

In-house.

Setup: A2019 is very easy. A single installer does it all.

Cost: Cheaper compared to Blue Prism and UiPath Orchestrator.

Licensing: Floating licensing 

We evaluated Blue Prism but it had a high cost.

Too frequent updates and major changes in each update is frustrating.

Our primary use case is automation development supporting internal business operations at KPMG. We have 100+ live automations, with v10 and v11 deployments.

Using this solution has freed internal operations employees to do more "human value-add" work by removing mundane manual tasks. It has improved the quality of these tasks through automation and enabled us to do things we couldn't have previously done due to time and cost.

The most valuable feature so far is Task bot deployment. We hope to expand to IQ Bot this year.

Automation Anywhere's interaction with Excel is a key benefit.

Currently, Automation Anywhere's debugging functionality is minimal.  Most notable is that it works on only the top-level task (not on sub-tasks called by the top-level task).  This limits its practical usefulness.  Increasing the robustness of the debugging functionality would be very helpful.

Additionally, implmentation of a "global" variable concept (variables shared across tasks) would be very useful.  AA's variable mapping between tasks is cumbersome.  

We have been using Automation Anywhere for three and a half years.