UiPath Platform Reviews

I'm the lead robotics engineer in my organization, and we are involved in marketing and research for new technologies such as mobile phones and laptops. We are an organization with 219 employees and started using UiPath for laptop marketing and advertisement for our customers.

Our clients have different requirements and strategies, and we build software robots tailored to their needs. A customer can send an email with attached PPTs, Excel sheets, PDFs, and images, and the bot can extract all the data and express it in the required format. This is uploaded as an article onto our website, and on our platform, so the marketing, advertising, and technology solutions specs are taken care of without any human intervention or involvement. We designed 39 robots for the same number of clients.

Our second use case is for invoicing; customers share checks for payments with us via email, and we have bots to extract that data and input it into our SAP ERP system, which is fantastic. The RPA automates billing on the financial side of our organization. 

We use the solution across 17 locations with servers managed centrally from our main office, connected using the UiPath Orchestrator. We have 19 licenses but only use 17 currently. We don't have more than seven end users as this is purely a tool for internal use; our customers don't have access.

UiPath's OCR enables data processing of handwriting, which in turn allows us to automate elements of the billing process from incoming customer checks, which is a fantastic feature for us.

Document Understanding is an excellent feature; it's very easy to use and provides the required data in a structured format.

The solution has excellent integration with third-party tools. 

We use ServiceNow, which is connected to UiPath, and they have fantastic integration. Therefore, we have calculated our time savings to be approximately 91,000 hours in the current year. Automation is a critical time-saving solution for us. 

The UiPath Academy courses could be improved, there are many courses, and some are more useful than others. I would also like to see improvements in course categorization to make it easier for newcomers to learn the solution.

Customer support could also be improved; they are very knowledgeable and helpful but hard to reach, and there are delays in getting to them.

We encountered some difficulties on the OCR side, and I requested new features and capabilities to address these. This may be an oversight on my part, but I would say some aspects of the OCR data extraction process can be improved. OCR and screen scraping are the only data extraction methods which isn't good for redundancy. I want more options in this regard, so this is another area with room for improvement.

We have been using the solution for nearly three years. 

The solution is stable; we didn't have any downtime outside of updating our environment. 

The solution is very scalable, and many managed packages are available to make that easier, as well as the drag-and-drop functionality.

We plan to increase our usage and are in touch with the UiPath sales team to discuss purchasing new licenses. We have around 60 new customers and need to upscale the solution to accommodate them.

The customer support team's expertise is impressive; they're very expert. However, raising a ticket is complex, and there can be significant delays, which isn't ideal when waiting for a fix. There is no clear route to contact UiPath, and this information isn't shared with new customers. If you know how to get in contact with them, then they are very knowledgeable and quick to help, but establishing that contact is difficult.

There was one occasion when I submitted a ticket and discovered it had been sent to their sales department after a couple of days, but I required technical support. There have been a few issues like this, but once you contact them, the support is fantastic.

Positive

I previously used Automation Anywhere for over three years at a position in a manufacturing organization. When I came to my current job, it was my choice to go with UiPath, and I chose it because it's more affordable and has better integration with third-party solutions such as Service Now, Office 365, and Check. Another consideration is OCR, as Automation Anywhere can't extract data from handwriting to my knowledge. UiPath has excellent capabilities, is efficient, and is more user-friendly than Automation Anywhere.

The setup was somewhat complex, as it was a new product for us, and we didn't have a clear deployment plan. The challenges weren't on UiPath's side; they were on our side. We had to build some infrastructure to support our on-premises deployment, and UiPath provided helpful instruction to assist.

Overall, the deployment took approximately three weeks and involved nine staff in total; my director, myself as robotics lead, two consultants, a developer, two members of the infrastructure team, and two staff from UiPath's side.

They could be better at sharing the appropriate setup information with the customer, as it was difficult for us to follow the steps outlined in the provided documentation. We had to get help from the technical support team, who are experts; they did what took us over a week in two days. If a good course were available in the UiPath Academy, that could have saved us that time. I must say that the UiPath technical support team was a great help during the setup. They provided substantial practical information and were central to our planning and implementation strategy.

Every solution requires some maintenance. As our deployment is on-premises, upgrades to our environment necessitate some downtime, usually one and a half to two days. One day to integrate the UiPath guidelines on updating the solution, and another day to upgrade the environment.

Our OpEx and CapEx costs have been reduced by around $38,000. Before using an RPA solution, we had 17 employees responsible for data entry and uploading. Now, we have robots doing these tasks, resulting in considerable savings. I would say our ROI is significant.

We find the yearly licensing cost affordable, and the UiPath pricing team is very accommodating to us. They allowed us to pay in installments during the integration phase. The friendly pricing is one of the main reasons we chose the solution.

We purchase 17 to 19 licenses and typically use 14 of them. They offer free extras like attendant reports, the Action Center, and Document Understanding APIs. The pricing and licensing are exceptional.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

When using Document Understanding with PDFs, if the document is over 16 pages, then the UiPath API must be used, which is available from the orchestrator. The API is both important and easy to use.

Our HR department is looking to hire an additional 17 employees to assist in managing our customers. We receive substantial data every hour from our 30 customers, which require reports. 

I highly recommend researching the solution and contacting UiPath for support with a proof of concept before any implementation. Having a plan and an idea of how to build the infrastructure is essential. UiPath is one of the best solutions available, but I would advise customers to follow the steps very closely during implementation.

My company's major use case for UiPath is to create automations for web and desktop applications. For example, we use it to automatically download content from another page or PDF. It's creating automatic programs to help us download data from the website or application.

For our organization, it has made our work a lot easier. Before UiPath, the tasks that we are automating were done manually and they were very time-consuming. Things were inefficient and many errors and bugs popped up. With the automation that UiPath has provided, the time required for those tasks has dropped significantly. A task that required four or five hours is down to 15 or 20 minutes, with zero or a minimal number of errors. That is one of the major impacts that UiPath has had. It has improved our overall efficiency.

The time we have saved can be invested in other aspects of our business, like lead generation or preparing the website. UiPath automation has saved us a solid amount of time.

Within a week of deployment, we were able to see results.

Another feature is the ease of creating programs with UiPath. Other RPA solutions are not that easy to use. Any person who is a beginner using this platform can learn it very easily. The deployment time and implementation time are greatly reduced when it comes to training our employees on this software. We are able to do our work much more quickly and efficiently with UiPath.

One thing that I personally like very much is the drag-and-drop capability in UiPath. I don't have a coding background. One of the major selling points of the solution is that it requires very minimal coding to create a program. It's very easy to drag and drop to create the required fields from the tool. That is one of the key and interesting features. The entire user interface and user experience is enhanced because of low-code and no-code abilities.

Other similar software solutions that involve coding take a lot of time because once you start coding there are errors that pop up. With the drag-and-drop feature there is nothing like that. It's instant. When you drag and drop you can see an immediate preview of what the output will look like. Work that would take two to three hours is done in 10 to 15 minutes, so that much amount of time is saved when creating a workflow.

Another feature is the Activities menu. It's a type of log system in which I am able to check what activities have happened. It keeps me updated.

The things that I use in UiPath are very comfortable for me and I find it very useful. I'm pretty satisfied with the current feature list. I don't think anything else is required.

There are two editions of UiPath. One is the free Community version and the other is the paid Enterprise version. I have used both. The feature updates in the Enterprise version are very regular and the support is quite fast. That's not replicated in the Community version. They could bring both versions to an equal level so that people who are just starting, with limited staff and a minimal budget, can use the entire feature list of UiPath in the Community version. 

Apart from that, in terms of the features and the simplicity of the product, it's on par with all the other top solutions out there.

I've been using UiPath for 15 or 16 months.

They do monthly product updates and, after an update, the system doesn't lag or crash. It's pretty stable for the updates that they provide. 

Until now, I haven't faced any bug, software, or performance issue with UiPath. It has been a smooth ride and I hope it continues like that.

I believe it is a scalable solution.

In our organization, it is deployed across multiple departments. Different departments use UiPath for different purposes. In our department there are 12 end-users of UiPath, but I'm not sure how many users there are in the other departments.

I don't think, in the near future, we plan to increase the number of users because, for our bandwidth, these people are using it concurrently. But when our business grows beyond a particular limit, obviously, the number of users will increase, but that won't be for another six or seven months.

For the Enterprise solution, the technical support is a 10 out of 10, but for the Community edition it's a six out of 10. It's not that quick with the Community edition. They respond after 48 hours when you raise an inquiry, but with the Enterprise edition, it's instant.

Positive

We didn't use a different solution. We took a manual approach before.

I wasn't part of the deployment, but since it's mostly a cloud-based product, I don't think maintenance is required. All the updates are over the air.

We have definitely seen a return on investment by using UiPath. We have saved a lot of time with it and that has ultimately resulted in our employees focusing their time on other important aspects of growing the business.

The main reason we went ahead with UiPath was the pricing. As I mentioned, they have a free version as well as the paid version. And the pricing of the paid version was not that high. It's low- to mid-level pricing. They maintain the pricing to cater to small and medium-level companies.

Aside from the standard licensing fee, there was an additional training fee but that was optional only. UiPath has its Academy where we could attend courses on how to use the software, but if you want additional training, you have to pay extra. We did that and took some additional training on UiPath to feel confident.

I don't use the machine learning and AI capabilities in UiPath because they require a little bit of coding, which I'm not very familiar with.

But one thing that I have personally taken out of my experience with the solutions is that people with less coding knowledge or with no coding background should definitely consider using UiPath. It reduces a lot of the dependencies needed to produce automations. In the past, people like me who are not from a coding background, had to be dependent on others, and a lot of manual work was required. But with UiPath, I get to do it myself. I'm not depending on anyone else. That way, there is no time constraint for me. That is the major piece of advice that I would give to people without a coding background: You have complete control and can get things done in your own time. It is much more efficient and simple.

Try the Community version as soon as possible and get used to the entire workflow of the product and then make a decision. It is pretty easy to understand the entire workflow. Play around with it and you will fall in love with the package.

All the features are very good. It's a cool application to use and it's one of the best out there in the marketplace.

We use it mainly for automating customer management processes and to speed up team collaboration. We use many different kinds of software, ranging from cloud services to legacy. We need our team to work between those applications and sometimes data has to be actioned. We were doing those processes manually and, as we grew our business, we realized robotic processes could intervene. We heard of UiPath, we tried it, and we were able to automate our process of working with the legacy system and other software.

We have a mix of attended and unattended processes. We are able to run some of our processes end-to-end, but some processes need moderation. We need someone to attend those processes to complete them.

Our invoicing system is a very old system but we cannot replace it right now. At the same time, we also have the latest cloud application for data analytics and manipulation. It is not possible for the legacy system to export data from that system. We use UiPath to extract and copy data from that old system and use it in our new system.

We have been able to automate the contracts portion of our business processes. Automating has saved us a lot of hours and given our team more freedom to be more creative and more productive. Overall, it has improved our business efficiency. It has increased our production capability. It has helped our business a lot.

It has saved our employees nearly 35 percent of their time so that they can work on other tasks. They have that much more time.

Attended automation is mostly used in our QA department and by certain parts of our marketing department. They include moderation by our supervisors and that has helped a lot. We are able to work efficiently with those processes.

We have been able to transform 25 percent of our processes to automation. That has created a lot of efficiency in our business. It has transformed our business to become more productive. That transformation did not require the purchase of expensive upgrades or IT support. We did not require any other software licenses.

And we have definitely seen cost savings because we are more efficient and we have more time to do more things. 

We have also been able to provide more reliable services because we have eliminated most of the human error that we used to have. Almost 90 percent of our errors have been eliminated.

It's quite easy to build Automations. They have plenty of resources. Furthermore, they have this new AI feature for process mining and task mining. It can record our manual processes and then it can suggest automations for them. Because of that feature, it's also relatively easy to implement UiPath for automation.

Some processes are very complex and very long, and sometimes it is very hard for a human to implement them manually. AI has enabled us to automatically solve those processes that would not have been doable by a human. It has given more meaningful information to our business and services.

When we have difficulty knowing what features are most applicable and how to apply features to particular processes, or how to solve specific problems regarding automation, we find answers thanks to a lot of the senior people in the UiPath community. They are really supportive when we are implementing automation in our business. 

Some of our employees also use MacBook devices for their daily work, mostly for high-graphic projects. UiPath doesn't have a complex set of features for OS X systems. If they could add more complex features for MacBooks, that would be good.

Also, it is quite slow sometimes when running very heavy and complex processes. It would help if they could improve their base speed.

I have been using UiPath for a little over two years now.

So far it has been very stable.

The support is good, very active and reliable. No problems so far.

Positive

We have been using UiPath for two years. When we see our financial results for the last five years, we have not seen that much increase in our business because there are other factors involved.

But we were able to automate our processes and be more productive in those last two years. We have many applications and projects going on. I think we will also see a financial increase in a couple of more years.

The pricing is transparent, and the best part is that they have the Community version, so there isn't anything to hide. You can try the cloud version. They offer plenty of time, two months, for a trial. There are other pricing models that are good. We have not used all of their services, but we have UiPath Studio and that has good, fair pricing.

We were considering Automation Anywhere and software from IBM, but we found that UiPath fits our needs better.

It was really fast and easy to get started with the UiPath. They had a Community version that I could just sign up for, download, and start using. There were plenty of resources online, on YouTube, to learn and implement it. Also, the community was active. The other RPA software was not like that. You had to phone, request a demo, and the way they worked was quite hard. We found it very flexible to use UIPath.

We work as a center of excellence and we develop automations centrally for other departments. All our deployments are unattended bots that are deployed and managed by us, centrally. They are all running on a virtual machine. Nothing is running on client computers or laptops. We do not have any attended use cases. The process owners are interacting with the bots.

We use the bots for a lot of reporting, including monthly and weekly reports. We are a construction company and we have a lot of reports for all kinds of things, such as construction projects, different construction sites, and various subsidiaries for regional departments. A region like Bavaria, for example, needs its reports. And there are plenty of controlling departments in all of the subsidiaries.

We also have some ticketing use cases. One of them is for IT services, meaning internal ticketing. That bot regularly checks our ticket software and automatically processes some of the tickets. For example, when an employee needs rights to a specific system, the bot checks whether they fulfill the requirements and approves or declines the ticket.

Another type of ticketing use case is more about processing customer tickets. As a construction company, we also do facility management, and that means there are a lot of external customers with their own systems in which they record tickets. The tickets are not visible in our local systems so someone has to go to the external systems, export the tickets, filter them, and then tell everyone what they're supposed to do to their buildings as a result. The tickets might be about small repair jobs, for example. We run this daily and, in the morning, everyone receives an email with all the tickets that have to be done within one day, three days, one week, et cetera.

Both of the ticketing use cases are connected with SLAs. If you miss a certain time frame before processing a ticket for external customers, you have to pay a penalty fee. For the internal tickets there are SLAs for internal tracking purposes. Because those tickets have to be processed within two hours, that bot runs every two hours and checks for new tickets.

Another IT services use case is for getting access rights to local drives.

We also have many recurring processes. For example, in HR they have to go to the system and confirm a process. It’s a necessary evil which is probably due to the legacy systems we have. Someone defined this process a long time ago and it still has to be done.

We also have use cases in finance and treasury. They are not tickets, but they process requests from employees. For example, they can request cash on a specific card and the bot will check the emails and then basically transfer data from an email, or from a PDF form attached to an email, and enter it into the finance system.

One last type of use case is where the bot works as an interface between systems. Data has to be exported from one system and imported to another system and there is no existing API. The bot exports and imports the data. We have one bot that exports PDF documents and sends them to an email interface. It defines a specific subject and then attaches the file. That file will automatically be uploaded to another system. Or the bot may log in to a system and upload the document. These use cases are due to the fact that there is no interface between two systems and they're either not big enough to develop an API or they may involve an external customer system and the customer has no interest in providing an API.

UiPath has freed up our employees' time and that's its main purpose. We don't have huge use cases, but for our bigger use cases it could be saving us 35 to 40 hours per month. With the smaller processes, people save about two hours a month. We have 23 use cases that are live at the moment and the total time saved by them is about seven or eight person-days a week. The big processes account for 50 to 60 percent of all the savings.

Employees have more time for more important things, but there are no direct cost savings from our automations. What we do have are a lot of efficiency gains and some time savings. Any cost savings are on the lower end of the scale.

The solution also definitely reduces human error. We have some processes that involve penalty fees if there is human error, so the reduction in errors has probably affected the business on a very small scale.

In terms of the cost of automations, before UiPath the whole automation process was much more complex. There might have been software providers involved in that process, charging us and providing APIs. And the whole process took way longer. Now that we have a UiPath license, the cost of implementing any automation is zero, other than our salaries, which would be paid anyway. The automation creation process is definitely a lot faster. It's also cheaper because there is no involvement of an external software developer, which is probably the most expensive part.

I like the REFramework. It's one of the unique selling points of UiPath because it gives you a framework within the software to structure your processes. It's perfect in terms of error handling and it provides a lot of functionalities for processing multiple transactions. It makes the whole solution more robust.

I tested the Process Mining at my previous company and I don't think it's suitable for RPA processes. It operates at a way higher level and, using it, you may find an area in which you can optimize a process, but it doesn't just give you a defined process for automation. It doesn't necessarily help you to identify the processes.

The Task Capture component offers the ability to record a process and it will give you process documentation. It tells you how many clicks are being made, and it will create screenshots. It tells you the basic activities that are being done in the process. When we tested it, the quality of these documents was very low. It took more time to take the output and make it useful than it would have taken to analyze and document the process ourselves. 

We are not using any of that. Together with the customer, we are manually defining and documenting processes. We are doing the actual automation, of course, with UiPath. In terms of monitoring it afterward, it's 50/50. Standard Orchestrator definitely offers you some ways to monitor your processes. It tells you how many processes failed and why they failed. You could also define a process that sends you an email when it fails.

UiPath also offers some BI components, but that requires a separate license and costs. We are not using them. The whole BI reporting functionality of standard UiPath is not that great. We use external dashboards in Power BI.

We also have a calendar application because, with standard Orchestrator, there's no overview about when you have bots running and when you have free slots. So it's also not great for planning license usage. The whole visualization piece, out-of-the-box, is not so nice. UiPath is mainly the automation tool for us, and it's definitely great for that. But in terms of analysis and monitoring, there's definitely still potential for the software.

I have been using UiPath for two and a half to three years.

Their tech support replies quite quickly. But when we had technical problems, most of the time, we had to have multiple calls. It's not that great. They definitely provided us with all the experts, but they just didn't immediately find solutions, most of the time.

It often took two to three days to fix our issues. We would have to explain the issue one or two times and then they say, "Okay, we need to do a call." After the call we would try out the solution but it wouldn't work and there would be another call. Support is another potential area for improvement.

Also, we bought our licenses from a UiPath partner. We are actually supposed to talk to them for support, but they charge for their consulting services. They are the reason we didn't have constant communication with UiPath. From my experience at my previous job, where we worked with UiPath, we were in close communication with the UiPath success manager. There was way better communication and support because we always had a channel that we could talk to regularly. And they already knew what our issues had been. If you are working directly with UiPath, the tech support is good, although not great.

Neutral

We did not have a previous solution.

I started in RPA with my previous company. My boss just told me to get into this topic. I started with the UiPath Academy before we were even using the software, but I could follow all the courses. It's all video training, so it's easy to follow. The Microsoft training often consists of long sets of text and it says "expected reading time is 23 minutes," but it's 23 minutes just to read the text. Now, UiPath even offers training exercises. 

And because they offer the Community version, you can download the full-featured software without actually having a license, for personal use and for training purposes. That way you can try out whatever you learn. That makes the learning very practical. And the Community version is not limited to 30 days like test versions of some other solutions. It's a version that you can use for testing forever and you can use all the functionalities. That definitely helped me when I did the training. That's how I got from knowing nothing about RPA to knowing a lot about RPA, before working with it.

If you have a basic understanding of the software, the most important thing is to develop with it, because that gives you practical experience.

They also have very specific, deep-dive courses, for working with Orchestrator, among other things. They're easy to find. You can invest two hours and learn the most important aspects of the UI and look for what you need.

With the Advanced RPA Developer certification, there is an exam. That is where I got the most practical experience. It's not just quizzes, it's also practical projects.

Overall, the Academy is great. It has training paths as well as very specific courses. 

UiPath is quite expensive and whatever additional components you want to use will have additional costs. We are not using the Document Understanding feature because of the cost. For Document Understanding, the cost may be per transaction.

Compared to Power Automate, UiPath is quite expensive to set up. What we are trying to do, and likely everybody tries to do this, is fully occupy one unattended-bot license before getting another one. So it's not just a matter of buying a few licenses, because they are quite expensive. That definitely also affects the return on investment, especially if you automate smaller processes.

Also, we are currently working with centralized automation development, but we are planning to decentralize it with citizen developers as well, for smaller processes. For that, we intend to use Power Automate Desktop because in that scenario the pricing disqualified UiPath. If you give a UiPath Studio license to many people—to fulfill the vision of a bot for every person—or even to one person per department, they would have to work quite hard to see a positive return on investment. 

For UiPath, you need Orchestrator, which is already quite expensive, although you can use just one to start with. But if you have multiple unattended-bot licenses and multiple Studio licenses, it gets expensive quite fast. 

Also, the whole pricing structure is very unclear. You can't find out anything about prices before talking with UiPath or with a partner. At that point, you're still not sure what kind of price you're getting. Of course, they offer savings when you order many licenses, but there's no fixed reference point if you haven't talked to UiPath before. There is no real information about what you actually need and how much you can expect it to cost. 

With the Microsoft platform, you can directly see the kinds of packages they have and whether they're charging per process or per transaction. You see the price. It's very transparent.

When I compare UiPath with other providers' solutions, UiPath offers a very structured development interface. It is more structured than the interface of Microsoft Power Automate, for example. It offers a very visually appealing way of structuring the processes in flow charts as well as in sequences. It makes it easy to see an overview of a process. I definitely like UiPath's development interface.

UiPath Orchestrator is definitely great, and better than what competitors offer because it enables you to use queues very easily, which again helps to create robust automations.

In addition, the UiPath community is the best among all the software communities that I've seen. There's a great forum. Whatever question you have will either be answered by other developers or even UiPath employees who participate in the forum. Also, there is already a huge stock of questions and answers about automation. Usually, you will get an answer to any question within hours or even minutes. Together with the training platform, the whole ecosystem around the community is much better than that of any other software I've ever seen.

In my previous company, we evaluated the big ones at that time: Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and UiPath. 

In my current company, we mainly evaluated two solutions. The first was UiPath, because it's probably the most powerful solution. The second was Microsoft Power Automate, which is now becoming more mature. Power Automate is probably also the easiest to implement because we are Office 365 users. We could just provide a Power Automate desktop license to any of our employees. It's definitely much easier to acquire Power Automate licenses and provide them to the users. It's directly integrated. There's no need for IT involvement.

In my opinion, UiPath is easy to use. Once you have been using it for a while, it's pretty easy. If you're using it as a citizen developer, meaning that you want to automate your own processes, it's probably a bit complex. It offers a lot of functionality and properties that can be edited per activity. You have to have a basic understanding of variables, arguments, et cetera, if you want to build a robust solution.

The macro recorder is not that nice. It's not like you can just record a process and then run it over and over again. It definitely requires some experience to create a robust process. All in all, I think it's easy to use. 

I also tried the StudioX version, just for testing purposes, and that may be a bit easier to use, but it's still not a tool that you can give to someone and they will be able to start developing on their own. In particular, they will not be able to run something unattended because that requires a lot of testing. It requires basic knowledge, which comes with experience, about the HTML selectors.

In general, UiPath is the most powerful solution there is on the market right now for RPA, mainly because of the easy structure provided by UiPath Orchestrator for larger transactional business processes.

We are working with automation, and it is very useful for my enterprise and our clients. We are using UiPath for building applications for automation purposes. Some of our clients are in the banking industry. They ask us to create applications to automate their processes, and we use UiPath for that.

Our overall productivity has increased because the bandwidth of our people has increased. Previously, when we were manually doing a particular task, it used to take us two hours, and after building the application with UiPath, the same task is taking around 10 seconds. From two hours, the time has come down to 10 seconds, which increases our bandwidth and productivity.

We are moving into robotics, and in robotics, advanced NLP and AI are being used. As tasks move from being manual to being automated, it definitely reduces the effort and improves productivity. The saved time can be utilized in a better way.

Its ease of use is valuable. For building an application, if I give this product to a newbie, he or she would be able to easily use it and build an application with minimum knowledge. No extra training is required. Its features are self-explanatory, and anyone can understand them, which is the main feature of this product.

I extensively work on the automation part, and I like the drag-and-drop functionality for workflows. Its graphical workspace or visualizations make it a unique product. It provides good visualizations, which are helpful in understanding the workflow. I am very impressed by its drag and drop functionality, and I would recommend it to everyone.

It can be improved in terms of platform integration. It is platform-independent, but it should be easy to integrate with different platforms, such as Windows, Linux, Cloud, etc. If I am using AWS for my server response, I should be able to integrate that into UiPath. 

If I can get some manuals along with the product, it will be good to see all the features that are available in it.

I have been using this solution for the last eight years. I have been in the software industry for about eight and a half years, and I have been using UiPath very regularly for my day-to-day work. 

Its stability is good. In the last couple of years, I didn't have any problems. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

We have a team of 30 to 40 people who use this solution. At this time, we don't have plans to increase its usage. If the usage of this tool grows, it would definitely be better. It will increase productivity and more efficient use of our company.

I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have used Visual Studio previously to build applications. I switched to UiPath because I like its interface and the drag-and-drop functionality. When I am building an application using this, it's very easy to edit the flow. I am very impressed with UiPath.

I'm involved in the development and deployment of applications. I have the knowledge, so for me, it is straightforward. Most of the features are self-explanatory, but there are certain features for which a newbie might have to refer to the manual.

The duration varies from application to application. It can be anything from 30 minutes to six hours. For the development of applications, we use the SDLC model. When our testing is complete, we deploy the application. We have a team of six to eight people for implementation. They are from the product team and the support team. They are software developers at different levels.

In terms of maintenance, it requires upgrades. It is a timely activity, and it happens once or twice a year. We do not have a separate team for maintenance. The same team involved in its deployment takes care of its maintenance.

We are able to build applications for our clients, and they are also buying them. So, we have definitely seen an ROI.

We are an enterprise. So, its price is bearable for us,  but I am not sure about the small industry. It might be expensive for them.

It is a promising tool. It is very helpful for my day-to-day work. For automation applications, this is the best solution. Its drag-and-drop functionality and visualizations make the work easy. It is a very good tool for me.

I would rate it a nine out of ten because I'm very impressed with this tool.

We are an auditing firm who has a certain level of tasks that are open for automating. These are complete steps, which can be performed by anyone, standardized, and do not involve any human intelligence. These are just basic human tasks. It is a long process, where in-between there are certain validation and verification steps as well as certain steps that involve a lot of documentation to go through. The organization is targeting all these tasks, which are completely static and can be automated, so they can get rid of them. Then, employees can work on something more useful as well as more productivity-oriented tasks.

Currently, I am dealing with our internal COE, providing RPA solutions to internal and external clients. UiPath is a driving force in our COE.

It is on-prem. There are a couple of discussions going around upgrading UiPath because there has been so much advancement with the solution.

Document Understanding was a game-changer. One of our clients has manual billing that needs to be processed. With the help of Document Understanding and UiPath Action Center, we created an excellent workflow for our client. It also gives us better accuracy. Now, there are hardly any exceptions in the client's billing documents that are being processed.

In my previous role, I presented some clients the end-to-end installation design of UiPath, e.g., building a PDD using Task Capture, going to UiPath Studio to build the actual solution, and then later going to post-production Insights. 

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-prem footprint. Most organizations prefer on-prem because it reduces the risk of compliance issues.

Attended robots have been very beneficial for our users. UiPath saves one robot for every user. We have a couple of clients who are using attended automation for their day-to-day tasks.

From an organizational point of view, the most used feature is Orchestrator because that is how we manage more than 100 users. When there are more than 100 users, it is important, and probably better, to have some place to manage them. Orchestrator is doing that for us very well. 

The most exciting new feature is UiPath Apps. I have explored it in-depth to get a better understanding. I think this product will be a game-changer for my organization as well as for my clients. It will revolutionize the way that we are providing licensing and proper access to a user. It also revolutionizes the way people are using it. Everything will be on the cloud, which I think is the most interesting feature of UiPath Apps.

UiPath Apps will definitely help to reduce the workload of our IT department by enabling end users to create apps. If you are creating an app and sharing it over the cloud, that removes the dependency of having UiPath installed with the correct version as well as Internet connectivity. Or, you might have a global server in the background that is not functioning very well. There are multiple issues related to connectivity of the UiPath robot when deploying it on a user's machine. 

If you are giving access to a group of users and adding Azure container or any other container provided by UiPath, then this reduces 10 to 15 hours of work from the IT or support guys who are manually doing all these things by themselves. Not every user must have the new step of getting the UiPath license and software installed, it is really static. You are eliminating that task completely by having UiPath Apps on the cloud. This is definitely convenient for users to use.

We are not using UiPath Apps in my current organization. About two to three months ago, I created UiPath when I was at TCS. It was there that we demonstrated the power of UiPath Apps versus normal, conventional methods. It reduced our work through scalability. It helped us to easily scale and was more convenient, because giving new or temporary access can be a pain. 

It is very easy to share UiPath Apps. When you want to start or remove it, you can do it with a simple click within the cloud. It is not that complicated. Also, the usage is better in UiPath Apps compared to the conventional UiPath robot. In UiPath Assistant, you can access the portal and simply run it over there. Therefore, you will not have a problem with the background functioning of the UiPath robot or even connectivity issues. Scalability and ease of use are favorable for users when they are using UiPath Apps.

Recently, I have been exploring Automation Hub. Its idea to pipeline a feature will be very useful for our guys managing RPA products on a large scale. 

When it comes to debugging, there is some improvement needed for UiPath compared to other RPA tools. There are features to edit the workflow or content of the automation file while we are debugging. For example, we have 10,000 lines of code that we have integrated by 10 different users. So, there is one integrated code and you are debugging it. After some time, you might find a line which is not an error. You may have forgotten to remove it or change the value to your desired criteria. It is really a pain to stop the entire debug session and just edit it, then start again at zero. It will do the same steps again just to reach that level or step where you were actually stuck previously. Whereas, in different automation tools, whether you are on the findings step or in-between a debug session, you can actually edit that information. This is good because sometimes the developer also forgets to add or remove certain values in-between a long code. I think this should be improved in UiPath. This should already be in consideration because I have been in touch with UiPath a couple of times because of this.

My current company is currently looking at the end-to-end solution. However, Insights and Task Capture are major concerns. Task Capture will give you a skeleton of the PDD, then you have to edit it. The skeleton is only there for simple automation, and we have complex scenarios. It is so complicated that the PDD generation using Task Capture will not give you even 20% of the output. While Task Capture is something promising, people are looking at it with greater expectations than it provides. People are not using Task Capture or Insight because of their limitations. These features could use improvements and enhancements.

I have been using UiPath for three years. I recently switched companies. I worked with Capgemini and TCS prior to this company, where I was in their COEs and providing solutions to clients. This is the first time that I have been on a project for PwC. Since the start of 2018, I have worked mainly in COEs and have interacted with around 30 clients up until now.

PwC, as a firm, has been using this technology for four to five years.

I have been using UiPath on a different powerful system that has high-end RAM. Sometimes, it crashes due to the use of multiple components at once. For example, when I was using Druid with data service and another UiPath product. Developing was quite easy. However, when debugging, sometimes it would freeze. I don't know whether it was because of my system and its compatibility, my system's configuration, or the fact that we were using so many high-end tools and products at once. 

The robustness of the tool, when it comes to using high-end products, is something that I am currently exploring. This is something that is currently a bit of concern for other developers as well. I have been interacting with a lot of developers around the globe. As a part of that, I tend to share my experiences. They have shared that it will sometimes freeze, even with simple automation. Because we are using new features or products all at once, it freezes. I think this should not be the case. If you are using long, heavy code, and it gets frozen at one point, I can understand that. However, 10 simple lines of code, while using three or four products at once, is getting frozen. That should be taken care of or improved.

To troubleshoot the system crashing, we contacted UiPath. They were kind enough to reply and have a discussion. They are working on this and trying to make it more convenient so future releases will solve this problem.

As a part of a COE, we get clients who expect us to present the entire proof of concept as well as a PPT or presentation. For example, why they need to go with UiPath, what are the advantages/disadvantages, if any, and why we should not go with another tool or solution as a whole, not just RPA. The main point for us when presenting UiPath is the ease of usability and scalability. We don't need major infrastructure changes, just two or three URLs to be widely fitted. Then, they need to decide if they want unattended or attended robots. The scalability is the major driving force which excites our clients and us, because there isn't a need to have media-heavy software or heavy processes changes.

Clients don't want every user in their organization who joins to have a long process to get through the start up. Automation Cloud is something they were very much interested in exploring because of the scalability. They find it very easy to use and scale, because not all the clients have a certain set of users using robots. 

I have seen user usage explode from zero to a bigger audience of 22 users.

UiPath is used extensively in my current organization on a large scale. There is also a plan to scale it to more users.

PwC has their internal teams providing a "help center" sort of infrastructure to them. If there was a need for any help, or some basic doubt, it is solved internally. PwC's internal help center exists already. However, for major issues, we reach out to UiPath, as a customer, so that we can receive a response and clarity on issues.

The technical support is really great. I have been in touch with all sorts of UiPath support because I was in the COE and our clients were completely global until my latest assignment. I think UiPath India, France, Belgium, and Canada are timely. They provide a very precise support experience. They were kind enough to let us know the actual reason, because just saying that it is a bug is not something that we can comfortably accept or digest. Also, they have been kind enough to follow back up on updates and bugs that we have reported.

As a whole, I have reported more than 25 bugs across all their products. They were kind enough to reach out to the same forum where we raised the ticket. They were kind enough to reply that these are the updates that they will roll out in the next version. It is good to have this interaction as well as a heads-up regarding your bug reports. I think the technical support is on the mark and doing their job really well.

The learning tools and support are really great. They have the most engaging forum across the globe, compared to other RPA tools. The learning and engagement are really up to the mark. That also brings confidence to our clients and us. We are a part of their global community forum, which is a benefit for us. 

Their marketplace has grown tenfold in the last year. It is because of the developer's involvement as well as involvement from people in the community. UiPath is creating their own statements and usable components, which adds value to our presentation. The tool is growing, and developers and community members are growing with them. 

My previous companies migrated from other RPA solutions, like Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and NICE Robotic Automation, to UiPath because of the value of its features and the quality of the overall solution. I migrated my clients from those companies so they could have a better ROI and reduce the cost of maintenance. We also migrated from scheduling tools, like AutoSys, to provide better accuracy and ease of use.

My current company was not previously using an RPA solution.

The initial setup and implementation are standard, simple, and user-friendly. UiPath just requires basic adjustment, then it is plug and play. It is very easy for everyone to understand, e.g., non-technical clients can understand what has been changed.

If the deployment is done properly, you will see better data accuracy with UiPath than manual entry. If the deployment is done by someone without much experience, it will affect the quality of the solution due to bad coding. You can't just leave it to the tool.

Using Automation Cloud makes it easier to deploy.

It takes almost two weeks for us to implement from scratch because we must understand the client's infrastructure, create a solution design, and then present it to them.

We present our clients with a PoC, including a document that justifies the work and costs. We also give them a standard robot that we created for demo purposes. This way, they can visualize how it will be implemented and mapped in their organization.

For deployment, one or two people are sufficient: one from an infrastructure background and another from a technical background. Sometimes, it is complex or hard to understand the client's needs when it comes to the deployment of Azure, Nvidia, or AWS servers on their VPN connection.

The amount of staff needed for maintenance depends on the size of the solution, e.g., the bigger solutions will need more people. However, the maintenance and support activities can also be automated and that reduces the need for support and maintenance. Three or four support team members are enough with the help of a robot.

The last ROI calculation that we did for a client showed that they saved 25% of their time by automating a manual task with an unattended robot for a single machine.

Overall, the cost remains the same to the client and us, when using Automation Cloud, because of the amount of money spent on the cloud migration and cloud usage.

At my previous company, in the best scenario, we removed almost 200 hours per month of client usage, making it automated with almost zero errors. So, about 32 employees were freed up from their work per month, and now there are only two. This has enabled employees to focus on higher-value work that involves human-base interaction. This saved the client money and provided a recruitment benefit.

UiPath has been useful for improving employee satisfaction. Employees are now spending time on more value-add work instead of something static, whether it is boring or hectic, that they have been working on for ages. This gives employees a sense of advancement.

I would rate the pricing as seven out of 10, where 10 is the most expensive. The pricing increased with the latest release. It used to be cheap. Now, it is expensive. However, it does come with supported features, which almost justify its cost.

Building automations is very easy. I have used multiple RPA tools. Developing automation with UiPath is very convenient compared to other tools. 

Development is very easy. I have been exploring certain markets based on the marketplace component and its native integrations with ServicesNow for the chatbot. I think development is where UiPath stands out as a winner compared to other tools because starting to automate is very easy.

Compared to other RPA tools, UiPath is leading with new feature additions every quarter. Obviously, all the new features will not be incorporated into the solution or be helpful for the client. We see the organization putting in efforts to grow at a rapid pace, including ML, scaling, and everything on the cloud, like data servers. UiPath gives us the confidence to present a tool that can be relied on because it is constantly growing. It constantly has certain new features added which can be beneficial.

With UiPath, not everyone needs to understand the code, which is great. This makes it superior over other tools because it is easy to understand. This contributes to profits because clients prefer UiPath over something else because they have more confidence using it.

Blue Prism has the ability to edit in the middle of a debug. As far as I have explored, Blue Prism is leading on the debugging front and stands out against UiPath. Debugging in Blue Prism gives users a lot of usability to edit the workflow. This makes it easier for developers to run things once and get things done. Otherwise, debugging multiple times can sometimes be a pain.

People migrate to NICE Robotic Automation because they were having difficulty maintaining their software with a limited number of staff. 

It is easier to become more proficient with UiPath than other RPA tools, especially Blue Prism. Training can be done at almost no cost.

I would suggest automating a policy that is not a requirement and follows a process. As an RPA user, it is your responsibility to get things done in an efficient way. If a user is doing A, B, C, D, it might not be required that the robot do the same thing. There might be a shorthand that can take you from A to D directly using the robot. For example, it can go directly to a page and not have to click 10 things like a human.

If you use it properly and consciously, it can increase accuracy and reduce error. If you don't, then it will be the other way around.

As features are concerned, it is reasonably priced compared to any other heavyweight tools in the market.

It is beneficial that there is a SaaS option because this offers a diversified cloud environment. If we expand and explore more cloud options, then having a SaaS solution for UiPath will be beneficial for us. Right now, SaaS comes with a certain amount of compliance issues for my company. 

UiPath AI Center is very useful. I think it is a game-changer when it comes to better usage. However, I haven't had much of a chance to explore it on an enterprise level. Not many clients are using it because of the exposure risk. Once a lot of developers start exploring and developing on it, then more companies will have the confidence to say, "Yes, we can push to that," which will increase the usage of UiPath AI Center.

Everything on the UIPath Cloud is a template. It is just a starting point. You have to dig into it and do more exploration to make it better.

Using Automation Cloud would be very beneficial for us, as a COE, because we are getting rid of the mundane tasks of infrastructure, maintenance, and upgrades, which we do not think are our primary job.

Biggest lesson learnt: UiPath has the fastest growing community with the quickest learning tools. It is easy to automate. It requires basic understanding and effort to get started. 

I would rate UiPath as 9.5 out of 10. I have concerns about the debugging capability, where if I need to edit something while debugging, I can't do it right away without stopping the process.

We use UiPath for our accounts receivable and accounts payable. We are a wood company that uses it primarily for customer care and finance.

UiPath helps us to reduce human error and eliminate some repetitive tasks involved in processing invoices, so our employees can focus on critical work. We have been able to assign users to different tasks. These tasks are done faster with fewer errors, and our customers our happier. 

The task recording is awesome. I love being able to see the processes and find out the issues a lot better.

I can't really say about the pricing and licensing.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10.

The solution is to get requirements over to Jira, then we use it to automate some of the processes. We can automate changes and statuses.

The solution is user-friendly and easy to handle. Anyone can understand it pretty quickly.

The robots are helpful. The orchestrator is easy to operate. 

The UI is simple and easy to understand.

It makes automation very easy. There are some use cases where you need a small amount of coding. It's a very low-code way of automating. That means you don't need much knowledge to start building what you need. Overall, it's easy to learn. You can even Google questions and find solutions to your queries. 

We can make end-to-end automation, even though I might now always use it that way.

The user community is very good. On their own website, you can find a lot of great information.Their documentation allows you to understand it pretty well. There are videos as well. They make it easy to understand and follow along. Seeing it visualized makes things much easier. And if you have any errors, there are many people all over the world that may have already dealt with those, so you can get information to help you adjust. 

Since it's low-code, we saw the benefits of using UiPath very quickly.

We've been able to minimize our on-premises footprint. 

I've used the UiPath Academy. I've been certified. There are lots of videos and you can go through and you can complete any number of certificates. 

When you make automation, you can save a lot of time. Using it, you can reduce your manual output. It helps VAs and managers save time.

The automation saves on manual labor.

They already have a good overview of the product and training. I haven't found anything significantly negative about the product. 

The pricing can be a big factor for a lot of users. It could be reduced to help more companies leverage its automation capabilities. 

I've been using the solution for the past five years. 

The stability is good. We haven't gotten any kinds of errors. 

The scalability is good. 

I've never contacted technical support. 

I've used other RPA tools, such as Automation Anywhere. People do need to have a bit more knowledge about AA before using it. 

The deployment is very easy. There are just some steps you need to follow. We were able to deploy it in three to four hours. We had three people handling the deployment process as well as testing and creating automation. 

There is maintenance if you make any changes to processes. For example, if an endpoint changes, the automation will need to be changed. 

Automation Anywhere may be more widely used than UiPath based on pricing. 

We're UiPath end-users. 

They have a feature called communications mining. However, I haven't used it yet. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's a good tool to start with when exploring RPA automation, and there are many free items available on the UiPath Academy website itself. You just need to log in, and you can get certified and start practicing. You can start practicing with creating your own bot. It's a very easy tool, and very user-friendly. With small, low-code capabilities, a non-technical person can learn it; it just requires small amounts of coding.