UiPath Platform Reviews

The way I'm using UiPath is to create workflows related to financial services. I work for a company called Cedar Financial here in Pakistan. The workflows are related to our data statements, clients' financial documents, and the like. It mostly involves Document Understanding and creating workflows to generate reports. My use cases are restricted to UiPath Studio, where I use the Activities to create workflows and automate some of my clients' work.

It's very cool to be able to create automations and reduce human effort. It really is a valuable and great tool to be working with. It has improved things immensely because our organization needs fewer human resources. In one department, 40 percent of the time has been freed up for other tasks. The work the bots do is more efficient and reliable. UiPath has reduced human error, which has had great effects: better results and better revenue. It has saved us about 40 percent of our costs.

Another important benefit is that UiPath enables you to implement end-to-end automation. Humans don't have to do repetitive, boring tasks.

The most valuable feature is its screen recording capability, where you tell it what the workflow should do, and it then automatically creates Activities for you.

It's easy to build automations with UiPath help. I have also been a Python developer, and there you need to do hard coding to create an automation. But when you're dealing with UiPath Studio, you have all the modules. You just need to know what to do and which Activities you can use. You get everything right, and the automation is ready for you. You don't need to do hard coding.

And UiPath's user community has been great for me. Every time I'm stuck somewhere, there's always a forum to ask questions and share my knowledge as well. There have been a few main developers, like Michael Jensen and a few others, whom I follow and really admire their work.

They need to keep fixing the bugs and improving the tool. For example, if an Excel file is running and I'm doing an automation on that Excel file, it doesn't complete. There are some bugs, and fixes and improvements are required.

The stability is good.

It's scalable.

Previously, I used Python and its multiple libraries and frameworks to do automation with Selenium and Beautiful Soup. We switched to UiPath because you don't need to do hard coding with it. You have more functionality. You just need to know what to do and keep on importing those activities. Create the workflow, and the automation is almost done.

UiPath is always a good investment.

I have tried Microsoft Power Automate, but UiPath has a lot of Activities and is easy to use.

The UiPath Academy is where everyone starts. I started there and took courses such as the RPA Developer Foundation course, and I still take courses from the Academy. It's very beneficial.

When you have RPA developers, they sometimes require IT support. The application team is also important in this.

The time it takes to implement a solution with UiPath depends on the problem and the workflow. Some might take 30 days, while others might take just one day. It does require some maintenance at times. There may be updates, or an error might appear. We have to provide support as well.

From a company point of view, it didn't take long to identify how beneficial UiPath could be. Every industry these days needs automation tools. If an employee generates the same report every single day, we can build a robot to do that.

It's a good and handy tool to use. Try it, and it will help you greatly boost your business. And your employees will be happy as well when their time is saved. Go for it.

I work in the financial sector, so my organization mostly used UiPath for disputes, fraud, and chargebacks. My organization had a pretty straightforward use for the tool as it had rule-based manual processes that required automation; otherwise, the organization had to hire temps for manual tasks. My organization used UiPath primarily for fraud and dispute bots, and chargebacks.

I found UiPath nicer than other RPA tools. I like that its enterprise version is pretty user-friendly, plus my overall experience with other components, such as UiPath Orchestrator, was pretty good.

I also found the tool's basic features, such as extracting values from Excel or PDF files and logging into applications, pretty decent compared to other tools. I haven't explored the OCI feature of UiPath that much, so I'm unable to give feedback on how good it is.

Overall, UiPath was easy to use, and building automation via UiPath was easy, with no blocks or restrictions from an application point of view, except inside a Citrix environment.

The tool enabled the organization to implement end-to-end automation. However, it was just a POC, and later on, the team didn't carry it out because the complexity was too high, not because of UiPath, but because of security reasons. The POC went well, but a closer look at the complexity made the team decide it wasn't a good business case.

As a user, I was pretty satisfied with UiPath.

The tool helped minimize the on-premises footprint, which was important because my organization wanted to go digital and had a target.

The team recommended UiPath Academy courses to some of the newly hired process analysts, particularly the UiPath basic course, but primarily, the developers already had advanced UiPath training.

In some cases, UiPath helped speed up digital transformation; in others, it slowed it. Sometimes manual handling was quicker than the bot because for some legacy applications the organization was using, you had to intentionally put some delays, for example, when pages take time to load.

UiPath also helped reduce human error and increase accuracy. My team didn't encounter any production incidents, but in some cases, when other applications or trusted applications, such as mail services, came in, sometimes the bot clicked the button, but still, the mail wasn't sent. The application was supposed to send an email to the client, but the mail didn't go through, though I cannot blame it on the bot, as it had something to do with the other application or service and not UiPath.

UiPath also helped free up employee time. The team calculated the OMDA for each business unit so each unit could focus on a more critical task, for example, where employees can be more innovative. The reflected hours were decreased by up to fifty hours due to bot usage, but it still depends on the business case. A small bot could save up to twenty to twenty-five hours, and in some cases, a bot can save up to one hundred fifty hours.

Initially, UiPath didn't help my organization save on cost, but in the long run, it did.

My organization hardly faced any issues with UiPath, except for a policy issue, mainly when my organization had to do automation inside a Citrix environment. Before that, the organization had to install another component from UiPath inside the Citrix environment separately. The team couldn't find the selectors it was trying to work with until it installed a component, which may be considered an area for improvement.

There are also many security protocols in the organization, and the team also worked with PCI bots. Sometimes, there was a block if the application didn't have the latest upgrade. There was a security block because, manually, people still worked with the older versions, but the bot wanted the latest upgrade from the application, so in some cases, there was a delay or failure, or the bot got killed. It was a mixed bag, so I cannot say it was one hundred percent successful, which is another area for improvement.

In the future, I would prefer UiPath to have built-in AI activities that an organization can quickly adopt, so you won't have to go to a third party dedicated to working with building AI components.

I worked with UiPath for two or three years until the start of this year, but now I've switched to another technology, such as DevOps.

In terms of UiPath technical support, A dedicated person attends to my organization's needs. You can email that POC, for example, when you need to register a license or device, and the response time is usually one to two days.

My rating for UiPath technical support is seven out of ten. The speed of response could be faster, and it would be better if support were more interactive, where the team could reach out to my organization monthly to check if it needed help or had some struggles with the solution.

Neutral

Before UiPath, I used Blue Prism. I found that UiPath was more user-friendly than Blue Prism, as even non-technical users can use it through the drag-and-drop functionality. UiPath also has a more enterprise approach. The UiPath Academy was also free, which helped a lot of beginners.

My organization had a COE deployment where the COE team was responsible for installing UiPath. My team also builds local robots from some of the ad hoc requests, so my team does the deployment for that.

We've seen ROI from some of the UiPath bots. Still, it was quite a journey because, at first, there were many apprehensions within the organization and the teams, primarily about backups, and nobody understood that robots could be a piece of software and not a physical type of robot. It took over two years to establish trust, and from there on, it was comparatively easy.

We found the pricing for UiPath reasonable. We compared it with Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, and based on features and pricing, UiPath stood out.

We evaluated Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism, but Automation Anywhere had many limitations compared to UiPath. Blue Prism, on the other hand, was expensive, so we settled for UiPath.

If I remember correctly, the version of UiPath I last used was the 2020 version.

I used the UiPath User Community sparingly. I logged in to see what other users were saying, and that was it.

My organization didn't use the tool's AI functionality for automation as it was still experimenting with chatbots, so with a chatbot, RPA, and handshake, my team didn't go that far.

In the organization, UiPath was deployed on-premises.

My rating for UiPath is eight out of ten.

I'm a UiPath customer. It's a tool used in my organization.

We use multiple types of applications, including SAP. I work on contract documents with UiPath mostly. I work with different clients in different companies. We use the solution to automate processes. It helps by reading contract documents and updating details in SAP applications. 

We use a lot of document understanding. It reads the documents for us. I had a document understanding from UiPAth about two years ago. They helped us understand how it would work. With it, we were able to build a solution for invoices and purchase orders.

I like that we can work with different types of classifications. Whenever you classify a document using an ML model, there is a license associated with it. However, the intelligent classifier doesn't consume any of the licenses unless there is a specific amount of usage on the respective document. We process around a thousand documents per day and the classification is free. It helped us process all of these documents. We were able to train our ML models easily. 

Building automation with UiPath is very easy compared to others. The UI is easy. There's a community forum where you can request help. They also have a marketplace to help you find customized solutions. 

Previously, a turnaround time for a particular process was two to three days. Once we automate the process, we can handle the process in three hours. The turnaround times have improved a lot. We've drastically reduced our turnaround time on each transaction we handle. That's reduced our costs by quite a lot. That said, I don't have an exact figure off the top of my head. 

The user community and forums are great. They are really impressive. When I started in RPA, it was difficult to find help or to help others. The forum gives us the platform we need to help each other and source solutions to problems. It's now easy to find answers. It helps a lot. 

We use the AI functionality. I've used it for 1.5 years. It offers good functionality. However, you need to have a good understanding of how to use the resource effectively. 

We've achieved 80% to 90% now using AI.

We can automate more processes now. We need to do a proper assessment first to see what we can get from AI. However, there's functionality beyond document understanding. That said, finding the right use cases can be difficult.

We've sped up digital transformation and the cost surrounding it. It also wasn't expensive to do so. We can go ahead with minimal cost. We just need to align the solution with the right resources.

It's reduced human error. We have the functionality to capture business exceptions. If we need human confirmation, it will get sent to the action center. However, by automating, we've reduced the need for humans. We've reduced human error by 20% to 30%. The bot will capture data in areas where in the past humans may have made mistakes.

The bot has freed up employee time. We do have attended automation. If there are tasks needed for humans, we've created the process in such a way that they can do these tasks and then spend the rest of their time on other activities. It's likely freed up human time by 10% or more. We'd only work on processes where there is a minimum of 10% reduction in human time. 

There are a few bugs and a few things on the technical side where certain features are not available.

There are some functionality limitations on UiPath that we could have access to on different platforms.

If we have to move the model to production, we have to download it and upload it again.  

I've used the solution for seven years. 

The solution is stable as long as you maintain it in a proper way. You need an admin and support team to take care of performance. 

We work mostly with enterprise-level organizations. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is good. If I have questions, they help me. However, I've had colleagues who have raised tickets and had trouble resolving issues. I personally have never had issues. 

Positive

We did not use other solution other than UiPath. However, I have done some small POCs in others. I've used Automation Anywhere, for example. There are different commands in AA and a few different features, however, they are both accurate and efficient.

I've set up the solution. The deployment takes a few hours. There may be software and hardware requirements If everything is there, it might take one or two days to get everything up and running. 

You may need to maintain your production servers after setup to make sure the bots keep running. We might have other weekly or monthly maintenance tasks to ensure everything is performing as expected. 

The solution is growing in price. It's getting to be too expensive. While I like the solutions they are providing, they need to balance the cost so that they can stay competitive in the market. 

I'm a customer.

I would recommend the solution, however, new users need to be mindful of the cost. If they have the budget, they should go with UiPath. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We use UiPath for robot authentication. We primarily use the software for accounting, particularly in our financial department, where we place some details from the client site, put them on a particular website, download the details, and then send those to a specific client.

I work for a big organization with many team members who access UiPath. On the client side, mostly enterprise clients, UiPath also has many users.

We've seen many benefits from UiPath, particularly from the client side.

The first benefit is manpower reduction, or reducing the number of people required to do the work.

Another benefit of UiPath is the reduction of errors. Sometimes, you'll notice errors from human intervention, but when the work is done via UiPath, you won't see any errors, so the solution has improved the success rate.

What I like most about UiPath is that it significantly reduced the amount of human intervention, which means that what usually takes people to do in ten to fifteen minutes would only take the robot one to two minutes.

I also like that UiPath runs 24/7.

I find the ease of building automation in UiPath valuable. It's easier to do that in UiPath versus other platforms, such as Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. My organization has a lot of activities and needs to give specific details and accesses, and I found that UiPath works in the final product.

UiPath enables my organization to implement end-to-end automation. Sometimes, it's required for the user interface, but implementing end-to-end automation still depends on the product and agenda.

The solution helped minimize the on-premises footprint of my organization, mainly because it allows you to do a significant amount of work remotely, so UiPath is the best way to minimize your on-premises footprint.

My team has utilized UiPath Academy, precisely the basic course, then the development course, and then the advanced certification. You have to start with the basic course that shows you how the platform works, then move on to the development course, and then the advanced course or certification.

What I like best about UiPath Academy courses is that you see several maintenance scenarios you don't get to observe daily. You'll see perfect examples of different scenarios in the videos plus the instructor has a good teaching style, so my team was able to understand the lessons easily.

I also found that UiPath has helped in significantly reducing the cost of digital transformation.

In terms of reducing human error, UiPath has helped decrease it by twelve to fifteen percent. Sometimes, humans working for five to ten hours become tired, while the robot can work twenty-four by seven without getting tired, complete the work on time, and ensure that all details it encodes are correct.

Because of UiPath, my organization doesn't need so many people, but you still need to manage the robot, monitor it, and ensure that reporting works fine. It's not like my team has to do another project after utilizing UiPath. Still, the solution requires managing routers, which now requires one person with UiPath versus ten people without UiPath, so that's one example of what the solution has helped reduce. UiPath helped free up about thirty percent of employee time.

I like the most recent update that was completed for UiPath because it helped solve the clustering case, and then the modern authentication is good.

What needs some improvement in UiPath is its Document Understanding functionality. It should be simplified because, right now, it's a little complicated to use, as you have to give it data or details, so in the future, I hope that could be improved.

I have been using UiPath for more than four years now.

UiPath is a stable solution.

Currently, we find UiPath scalable, but we still need to observe and monitor it for an extended period to check its scalability.

We have not had any issues with UiPath technical support. They've helped us a lot and have provided a lot of input, and we are satisfied with how they've handled different types of issues.

Our rating for them would be seven out of ten.

Neutral

I've used Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

In my organization, my team previously used Excel Automation, which means the team uses scripts and macros to automate tasks. However, there was a lot of limitation, while in UiPath, there was none, so my organization switched to UiPath.

Deploying UiPath wasn't as complex. My organization has a lot of members who can access everything. There wasn't any issue with deploying the solution.

At the moment, I haven't seen ROI from UiPath, but maybe in the future, I will.

I find UiPath a reasonably priced solution.

My organization currently doesn't use UiPath to automate processes that deal with good causes, but there is a possibility in the future.

The organization I belong to has not implemented the AI functionality of UiPath in its automation program.

UiPath is currently deployed on-premises, but the team is considering moving it to the cloud.

Sometimes, the solution requires maintenance, specifically on the server side, as that runs 24/7, so you need to integrate and do some checks to maintain UiPath.

I recommend UiPath versus Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. If you are using other platforms, I suggest moving to UiPath.

My rating for UiPath as a solution is eight out of ten.

My organization is not a UiPath customer. My organization is an integrator that creates the robots and recommends UiPath to businesses.

We use a feature called Document Understanding to extract data from invoices and generate reports. It uses the invoice number, amount, line amount, description, addresses, remit address, and other fields. This is the current project I'm working on. I'm using all the features available in UiPath to train the invoices to identify all the fields. Then, I deploy the training, create a pipeline, and use that ML skill in my coding while developing a project.

We are doing this for our team talent payments team. They usually receive different invoices from vendors for various reasons. My company currently has 700 vendors listed. These vendors send invoices for their services, and the talent payment team used to fetch and extract the data manually before we started working on this project. Whenever they received an invoice, they would open it and write down the data.

We have now completed phase one of the project and are in phase two. For this process, the bot will receive all the invoices and extract all the data needed by the team. We will then create a consolidated report in Excel for each vendor and present it to the talent team. This automation saves the talent team time. In addition, I have used email automation, Excel automation, API calls, and UI automation in this project.

We deploy UiPath on-premises, cloud, and hybrid environments depending on the organization's requirements.

Building automation using UiPath is really easy. Studio is a drag-and-drop environment with different palettes, search options, and simple properties, inputs, and outputs. It doesn't take much effort to develop a workflow in UiPath, even complex ones. UiPath also has recorders, so we can perform our actions and start recording before we perform them. UiPath will then develop the workflow for us based on our screen actions.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation, which is important to me from an analytics perspective. It makes it easier for us to provide solutions to businesses, regardless of their requirements. With UiPath, we can keep manual interaction to a minimum, from providing input to getting output. UiPath apps and interactions also make it easier to automate processes. In the past, people would develop scripts to automate tasks, but they had to keep in mind that there would still be some manual work involved, such as preparing an input file. With UiPath, we can minimize this manual intervention and prerequisites. This is a significant advantage.

Everyone on our team uses the Academy Courses when they start using UiPath, and whenever a new feature is added, we search the course list for the updated courses. The biggest benefit is being able to learn UiPath directly from the developers, rather than from a third party. When we learn from a third party, they have to learn UiPath first, and then try to explain it to us based on their own understanding. But when we learn from UiPath, it's like a personal experience, because they developed the product and know how it's supposed to be used. The other great thing about the Academy is that it's very interactive, with question-and-answer sections and plenty of resources. For example, they provide input files so we can try out new features. All in all, the Academy makes it really easy to learn UiPath. We just have to take the startup course, and they explain everything through videos, interactive sections, questions, tests, and data flows.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of our digital transformation.

It also helps reduce human errors in the normal processes that we develop.

UiPath has freed up our employee time. For example, in the onboarding and interview processes, our organization may have many people applying on any given day. Sorting through applications was done manually, but with UiPath, the process has been significantly sped up. UiPath now performs all of the tasks, such as getting candidate details and making consolidation reports for the hiring team. Overall, UiPath has saved us a lot of time and effort, and it has been a great return on investment.

The most valuable feature is the document understanding feature of this current project, which is better than ABBYY FlexiCapture or Automation Anywhere. It can learn on its own, given enough instructions and data. With training, we can actually train it to recognize the specific fields on invoices that we want. For example, UiPath can still provide information from a few of the invoice fields without training, such as the invoice number and date, which are present on every invoice. However, some vendors have specific fields on their invoices, such as the candidate name, job location, or start date, which we can train UiPath to recognize. This gives us the ability to train UiPath beyond the common things, if we are looking for any specific information or if we want to personalize it for a vendor. We are then able to use this trained model in our code, which is very helpful.

I also like the Excel automation feature. UiPath has recently updated the Excel activities package, which gives us more options with a more modern look and feel.

I find the features UiPath provides to be excellent, but the documentation is difficult to maintain. I have noticed that it can be difficult to find information on some features in the UiPath documentation portal. The document portal needs to be kept more up-to-date. UiPath will release the new feature, but the document portal will still have the older version information. The documentation portal could be easier to navigate if it were redesigned to make it easier to find information about a particular feature. It would be great if the portal were updated as soon as new features are released.

I have been using UiPath for almost three years.

We have occasionally observed some abnormalities, but we have not yet found the cause. For one of the processes, we are running macros and triggering them with UiPath. These macros can take ten to eleven hours to run. Sometimes, UiPath stops while a macro is still running. Once the macro is completed, UiPath is supposed to perform another task, but the macro takes so long to run that this does not happen. I believe this is a problem with our program, as it is taking too long to complete. These kinds of delays can occur, and that is understandable.

There are many areas where support can improve. However, it is not that bad. In terms of sticking to schedules, they are available quickly and listen to all of the problems. Sometimes, we have hit roadblocks because the people assigned to solve a particular support ticket did not have any idea about the feature. This has caused problems for us, as we have had to spend time filling in another person who actually had the knowledge about that feature. We have run into this problem a few times. 

Neutral

Our organization previously used Automation Anywhere, a script-based RPA tool. The fact that we moved to UiPath suggests that we wanted to change products for a reason. We must have heard that UiPath is better than Automation Anywhere in some way, which is why we made the switch.

We have seen a good return on investment.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten. UiPath has a lot of features they are working on but they take a long time to enter production.

Maintenance for UiPath is minimal. Small things such as changing the passwords because of the password rotation policy. We maintain our bots through VMs that run on AWS.

I recommend UiPath because it is a low-code/no-code solution that can be used by non-technical people. The Academy courses, which train users specifically on how to use the tool, make it easy to develop and automate processes. UiPath also offers a community version that includes most of the features of the paid version. Earlier in my career, I learned to use Blue Prism, which is a closed-source solution that only had basic courses available in its academy. It was difficult to use compared to UiPath, and it was hard to get any information on any forum or from its academy on how to use the tool and update it. In terms of learning, use, and understanding, UiPath is much easier than other solutions.

I'm using one or two robots. We use the solution for reports. We have another software yet we don't have support. Instead of pulling reports manually, we use the program to get the reports and pull them for us. 

The solution is very simple. We can easily create robots. It's easy to build automation.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. We have some manual procedures and it helps to complete those tasks. 

We use the UiPath user community. It's free. 

The amount of work we have is very small. We don't have big workflows. However, employees can now spend time on other things, and it's helped us manage our time around reporting.

The company has helped us minimize our on-site footprint.

We've used Academy courses. I've done classes myself. I don't use it every day. I've only used it once, actually.

The solution speeds up digital transformation and reduces the cost of digital transformation. with UiPath, we do not require expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support.

UiPath has helped reduce human error. It has also freed up employee time. It has saved about 20 to 30 hours or so.

I've dealt with compatibility issues with Microsoft components. When we upgrade the UiPath framework, we might be able to fix the issue. 

We'd like the accounting team to be able to have improved data out of SAP. 

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The product has been stable.

It's a scalable solution. We have about 150 people using the solution. We may increase the usage in the future if we have an opportunity to apply more robots. 

I haven't worked with technical support.

I did not previously use a different solution. 

We're using the 2023 version of the solution. 

I was involved in the implementation. 

The setup was straightforward with the help of UiPath documentation. The implementation process took less than one day and we implemented with one or two people doing the work.  

UiPath does require a bit of maintenance, however, it is not that much. We're mostly just dealing with compatibility issues with Microsoft. 

We deployed the product ourselves. 

As for the cost, I'm not sure if it has saved us money. The customer still keeps the same number of employees, for example. That said, the important thing is to reduce the time it would take for them to handle tasks. In some ways, it's done that.

Our use case is still very small. Therefore, we don't want to buy a solution that is too big for us. We don't want to pay more than $10,000 USD for a license. Therefore, we're focused more on the community version. 

We did evaluate other options. We found UiPath to be more localized. They were one of the top solutions.

We are UiPath partners. 

We do not use the solution's AI functionality just yet. We're only using small automation. We also have yet to try the document understanding features. We still need to try some advanced features and I look forward to experimenting with it.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I would recommend the solution to others who need to create automation. 

Our use cases are generally related to front-end UI-based automations that emulate tasks done by teams. For example, we do front-end SAP automation for data entry and scraping or posting data to websites that are related to the organization. We use UiPath for other automations like extracting and manipulating data from Excel. The primary use cases are in finance, HR, and operations. In logistics, it's used in full-sprint solutions.

UiPath's ability to do end-to-end automation is crucial. If we do the automation in bits and pieces, it's challenging to integrate it. The best part is that the turnaround time is drastically reduced because the process isn't being put on hold in between two manual interventions. The more permissions we apply, the more we reduce the turnaround time. However, the smaller automations don't impact the turnaround time that much. If the logic is set correctly, it can completely eliminate human error. 

The UiPath community development forum is helpful. Developers can access all the information they need if they get stuck. For our use case, we refer to OpenMedia, not any particular program. To understand what are the RDP use cases. I personally follow primary and secondary research forums as well as McKinsey's technology consulting newsletters and documentation.

The UiPath Academy explains various use case scenarios through videos and training sessions. It's all practical, hands-on instruction instead of purely theoretical. That made a significant difference by increasing our confidence in the product and ability to create our own automation. You can track each team member's training steps in parallel because everyone needs to be on the same page.

Uipath doesn't necessarily reduce our on-premise footprint. We use UiPath to automate configuration integration, so I can't say there is any direct impact because RPA is now just part of our on-prem ecosystem. The solution doesn't require expensive or complex application upgrades, but certain applications need scripts to be enabled to get UiPath working on their front end.

It saves time, but the amount varies. Each process has a different impact depending on the frequency of that process. If a process is running daily, the values are high, but sometimes it's low. The organization aims to have one bot per person, so everyone has one attended bot that can replicate their monitor network. It's the equivalent of adding one FTE per year by default per person. Every person can have a bot, scale up the work, and get more done in a day. 

The amount of money saved also depends on how often the process runs. We pay per bot, so if the bot isn't running frequently, we might not save any money. However, if the requirement is to do many more tasks than a single person can handle, it makes sense to use a bot, and we can save a lot of money that way. Sometimes, we have different goals beyond just saving money or reducing the time that our staff members spend on tasks. We might deploy a bot to improve the user experience and save the user some time. In some cases, we might not see short-term savings, but we'll see a benefit from it in the long run as the process volume increases.

The feature I like the most is ONEWEB UI automation. UiPath's OCR technology also works well. There is another feature called Action Center that lets you decide what happens after the data is captured. It passes the data into Action Center, where a person can review and approve it before it goes to the next step. It helps us manage our attended bot processes.

It's generally easy to build processes because of the drag-and-drop configurable suite. However, more complex expressions may require some kind of functional coding. UiPath also has some prebuilt functions in its training module that can be utilized to enter the expressions and get the job done. That's one workaround.

UiPath's built-in integration with Python scripts could be more robust so that I do not have to depend on another technology and I can do everything on one platform. 

Each program you write on UiPath contributes to bot consumption and utilization. As you add more bots, your costs will increase for more actions. Python is open-source, so it is totally free. Depending on our automation needs, we go back and forth between these two technologies. Better integration between these two tools will help organizations cover all areas of automation without more cost-effectively. 

I have used UiPath for approximately two years.

I rate UiPath nine out of 10 for stability. We haven't faced any challenges with UiPath's stability because it is a SaaS product. It runs on the UiPath cloud, and things are working fine. 

UiPath is fully scalable. I haven't faced any challenges in terms of scalability because the cost is not per user or per process. It is priced according to the amount of bots being consumed, so it all depends upon the complexity of your own project. If the complexity is lower you can reuse and share 

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. They always respond with solutions within the time established by the SLA. 

Positive

We were working with Power Automate. It has benefits from a cost perspective. The cost per developer is much lower relative to UiPath. Power Automate is a more cost-effective solution for larger enterprises. However, UiPath has more technological capabilities, and it's more user-friendly for developers, which is why UiPath is being adopted more over Power Automate. At the same time, Power Automate is continuously improving, so it may reach the same level as UiPath in the future. 

We are using the cloud version of UiPath, which is hosted by the UiPath team themselves. We do not use a private cloud. The network configuration didn't take much time. The deployment involves setting up a UiPath account and configuring permissions. It is a SaaS platform like Office 365.

The deployment time is just the amount of time required to develop processes for the project. It depends on the size and complexity. A project with hundreds of activities might take a few months, but a simple project with only two processes can be done in a few hours. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. 

We use UiPath to automate daily repetitive tasks.

I would rate the ease of building automation with UiPath a nine out of ten. It saves us a lot of development time, and the drag-and-drop feature is very useful. The cloud version's orchestrator is also amazing, as it can host our robots.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation, which is one of the most crucial parts for our customers. Most of our users are not technically proficient and do not know how to deal with these things. They want the automation to be complete without any manual intervention.

The UiPath User Community is really helpful and has helped solve a lot of problems.

The biggest advantage of UiPath is that a lot of time is saved, which can be used for other projects.

UiPath Academy courses are helpful. They help us gain a deeper understanding of the product.

UiPath's AI helps us perform more complex processes in automation.

It has helped us speed up our digital transformation by removing a lot of manual work.

Speeding up the digital transformation process does not require any expensive upgrades or much IT support to keep UiPath up to date.

UiPath has helped to reduce human error. This indirectly allows our customers to focus their employees' time on more productive projects.

It has helped us save time.

UiPath helps reduce costs, especially for accounting companies. They are able to automate basic tasks reducing the number of people required for daily tasks and can also have those tasks running twenty-four hours a day seven days a week.

UiPath is a no-code automation tool that saves me a lot of time when developing workflows.

UiPath is very slow for scraping. If they could make it faster, that would be great. We are currently using custom robots to scrape data, which is faster.

The initial setup of UiPath can be complicated. It would be helpful to have an executable file to simplify the deployment.

Integrating UiPath can be a complex and error-prone process, especially when it comes to calculations. A helpful feature would be the ability to add simple workflows using executables, which would be especially beneficial for small projects.

UiPath needs to be more compatible with MacBooks.

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

The UiPath software is generally stable, but some of the packages within it can sometimes be unstable. For example, we have had to switch to older versions of some packages in order to get them to work properly.

I would give the scalability a rating of seven out of ten. As we scale, we involve more users and machines, which means ensuring compatibility.

To deploy, UiPath needs to be installed on the production machine and the extensions need to be ready. One person is enough for the deployment.

The initial setup of UiPath can be complex, as we sometimes need to explain to customers that it is not as simple as copying and pasting an executable file. UiPath requires some setup and configuration in order to work properly. 

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

The decision of whether or not to use UiPath depends on the customer. If the customer is a Windows user, then UiPath is a good choice because there are many third-party packages available that make tasks easier. The orchestrator cloud functionality is also very helpful.

UiPath is easy to maintain because it integrates with other applications.

I recommend UiPath for Microsoft Windows users.