Wow... where to start? Right off the bat, yes, Actuate can be complex and a PAIN to work with. Basically, it depends on the size of your organization, the content/complexity of the reporting needs (especially volume and distribution) and some other key factors.
I know some companies that just did not need the horsepower of Actuate, so they were fine downsizing to Crystal (and Crystal is just that: a backward step in really all areas. Sure, Crystal can do some things from the development POV easier than Actuate, but there are many things Crystal CAN'T do that Actuate can.) Conversely, I know some companies that need more than Crystal could provide and moved up to Actuate.
There's an independant study whitepaper out there somewhere (on Actuate's site, I'm sure) comparing Actuate to Crystal: one white paper on a clustered environment, another on a single server. Here's the link:
I have worked exclusively with Actuate for the past 4+ years, so I'm not up on Crystal very much. I was a consultant until Jan. of this year. The company I work for now is looking to possibly move away from Actuate as well, but if they do it won't be Crystal (I'm getting ready to evaluate Microsoft's SQL Reports, so if you know of anyone familiar with that, I'd love to hear from them!); however, the move would be more because of 'personality' rather than techical reasons: the owner doesn't like the Actuate sales rep's. He thinks they're arogent -- which they are.
Anyway, I hope this helps!
