Fortra's scalability is excellent because you can increase the number of bots, studios, and developers. If you have a critical process that requires high availability, if one process fails, you need to have another bot pick that up. A big company cannot fail to pay the payroll. 

It's flexible because you can choose what you want as needed. If I need more bots, I can add them. Maybe I have a project where our resources aren't stable. I can add a subscription for another developer for six months and pay more to use this bot. I don't need to have a perpetual license for developers.

The scalability is quite good, however, it can be a little bit expensive. If you want to expand, it will cost more.

While I'm not working with the organization that uses this solution anymore, at the time, about six months ago, there were about seven people on the product.

Automate is a highly scalable solution. As I mentioned previously, we also have an unlimited bot version, so we can deploy multiple agents. We can use load balancing across these agents. We can also set up agent groups, where we have an agent group running a certain task and a load balancer to distribute that task among these agents. We have failover and high availability support.

Only three or four people use the solution, primarily from the IT department. The whole company benefits from the solution.

Automate is extremely scalable, based on your licensing level, of course. But if you have a good software management tool built in a good environment with enough resources, you could scale almost indefinitely depending upon the number of servers and resources you have in your virtual environment. You can scale up, no problem. Just add more memory, more RAM, and more processes. You need to be more strategic about your scheduling of tasks.

It's a very scalable solution. We have an unlimited bot version as well, so we can deploy multiple agents. We can have load balancing across these agents. We can set up agent groups as well. We can have an agent group running a certain task, and we can have a load balancer to distribute that task across agents. We have failover support and high availability support. So, it's a very scalable solution.

It's usually deployed in one location. I don't have much experience with clients deploying in multiple locations. I've only seen them use multiple servers, but they're all local servers. It's only supported for Windows, so there's no Mac or Linux support.

We've done implementations for enterprise-level customers to small and medium-sized customers. Its biggest selling point is that small and medium customers usually find solutions like UiPath and Blue Prism far too expensive. They find Automate's pricing much more competitive. 

I have yet to experience scaling the product, but I know they have network and standalone versions. We have the standalone version.

We have specific use cases like secure file transfer. And it has been scalable for our business case. So, for us, the scalability is a ten out of ten.

The solution appears to be scalable, however, our lack of time to analyze and experiment is a major setback.

The scalability is excellent. It's a very good selling feature for the product. If a company needs to scale, it can do so with ease.

The companies we work with are rather large enterprises.

It seems scalable to an extent. We've 15 users using this solution.

We haven't really tested the scalability. We haven't tried too many integrations, for example.

We have six full-time users on the solution right now.

Based on our records, I'd rate it around nine to ten, which is excellent. However, our on-premise servers need improvement, consistently posing challenges, prompting our decision to transition away from this setup. I'd rate on-premise performance at around five at most.

The scalability has been very good so far.

We have been using it in a Home Depot-like organization in Costa Rica. It's deployed in over 42 stores there, across different servers, and it is working very well for them. They love the solution and plan to use it more and to increase usage as well.

Typically, we work with medium and large-sized organizations.

Scaling this product can be very complicated and confusing.

We only have a single client using it.

AutoMates scalability will satisfy most any company's growth requirements.

As the solution is on-premises, the scalability is limited. 

Just last month, we bought a new license, and therefore we do have plans to continue to use the product.

We have about 30 people currently using the product.

We have only implemented the process in the HR department, which has approximately 400 employees. Our intention is to implement it for other uses, as well.

In my opinion, so far, the scalability seems to be good. However, I would not say that the scenarios I have seen are very difficult.

We have seven or eight clients using this solution, and only one or two have more than fifteen or twenty processes that have been automated. Having this number of processes with three to four robots, running twenty-four hours per day, is not a difficult test.

The roles of the people using this product vary depending on the client. In the Portuguese market, it is common to have one department that manages the robots for the entire organization. Normally, this is not the IT department. I know of only a few cases where robots are spread across different departments. Usually, a dedicated team or four to five people will manage, evaluate reports, corrects errors, and implement new requests.

No, you can scale very easily by adding agent licenses and deploying these agents on different computers. You can see these agents as small runtimes of the actual BPA server. This way you can deploy the workflows across the agents and spread the load between the different computers. You can also add development licenses to allow more concurrent developers connecting to the AutoMate console.

We were only using the free version and not the paid option. However, that said, I did find it to be fairly flexible. It could scale if you needed it to.

We haven't really used the solution for too long at this point. There aren't too many people using it in our organization.