UiPath Platform Reviews

We have quite a few use cases, and a few big ones are creating purchase orders, reviewing invoice PDFs and extracting information from them, and creating customer orders from forms that are emailed in.

UiPath Orchestrator is a valuable feature for us. We started with all attended bots without Orchestrator, on-premises, or on the cloud. It was almost like a very low-cost way to prove that we needed this technology and that we could use it. So, for our first year, we did that. For the second year, we got Orchestrator, and it gave us the ability to utilize the bots more effectively. I thought we were going to have more attended bots, and we didn't because the process owners wanted things to happen in the background and wanted to be able to schedule them. Being able to do that and not have to have someone worry about triggering the bot or babysitting the computer while the bot runs, etc. have been the biggest game-changers for us.

The biggest benefit we've seen from using UiPath is time savings. Since June, when our fiscal year started, we've saved 8,000 hours so far. We're measuring everything in terms of hours saved, mainly because that's where we see the most benefit. I haven't really seen a big cost reduction, like replacing people with automation. Our teams are pretty slim right now.

A lot of the time what we found was that people were working extraordinarily long days. Now, they're actually able to do their job because they don't have all these other things that they had to take care of before. With some of our use cases in customer service, we've been able to avoid costs by not having to hire temporary staff. This is because a lot of the transactions that they would've taken care of are now done by the bots. They are doing it faster and more accurately. We have automated 36 processes so far. We have three attended, but most of our processes are unattended.

The biggest value of the UiPath Academy courses has been the ability to point new citizen developers to it. They are self-guided and require very little oversight from the team, so it provides the ability to grow a citizen development community with very little time from our team. The UiPath Academy is also useful for onboarding new team members; you can point them to some of the basic courses and have them get an idea of what RPA is all about, what we have, Orchestrator, etc.

UiPath Insights needs improvement. It's been almost five months since we got it, and I'm yet to see a business impact dashboard, which was the selling point.

Trying to get Insights support has been really tricky. The documentation that's out there is not detailed enough, and it doesn't really tell you how to make it happen. I've paid for a product for five months that I still can't present to my senior leadership.

I've been using UiPath for about two and a half years.

The stability is good overall, and we haven't really had any issues. We do have certain processes, especially with certain systems, that are very finicky, and we have to go back and keep updating. I don't know how much of it is UiPath versus just the nature of automation.

We got premium support, but getting the attention of the person that is dedicated to our account has been really hard. It shouldn't be that hard, especially not when we're paying $12,000 a year for it.

We've also had a lot of issues with Insights. When we get to the right person, it's helpful and easy, but getting to the right person is way too complicated, especially considering that we're paying for premium support.

So, I would give technical support a rating of seven on a scale from one to ten.

Neutral

We went with UiPath because they are a leader in the robotics industry.

The initial deployment was complex. We started with all attended, and transitioning from attended to orchestrated was not easy. Nobody understood that we had been operating robots without any orchestration, so whenever we talked to UiPath, they would tell us to get our on-premises Orchestrator and migrate it to the cloud even though we didn't have an on-premises Orchestrator. They should've already known that because they had all the details. It wasn't straightforward, but we did it.

Transitioning to Orchestrator in the cloud, probably, took us three months. 
We had to recreate workflows because the workflows were attended to.

We did it ourselves.

I talked to the CIO of a medical company, and they had implemented Automation Anywhere. They had a good experience with it, and it was good for their use cases. However, their use cases were very different from ours. So, I talked to some of our partners, and one of our partners had a relationship with a UiPath partner, so we did the proof of concept with UiPath. It worked, and so we just went from there.

Understand what your goals are with RPA, and make sure that UiPath is the right vehicle for it.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate UiPath at nine.

We have implemented a couple of use cases. One is with our creative collection scenario. We are also working on order automation. That will go live in October.

Since we are fairly new, I will say we have only two scenarios running right now, and they've been going on for almost a year. It's definitely saved us a lot of time. We haven't rolled out too many scenarios yet. When we'll be rolling out our order automation for 15 countries, I will see more benefits in the uses as we go.

The most valuable feature is definitely the document understanding. We have started using it for the order automation project that I'm working on. It definitely has some challenges also, especially dealing with other languages. However, so far, it's good.

We only have our Cash App or our credit collection scenario. We save around one-tenth of the time we typically spend where a lot of transactions happen. We save around 60 hours every month, at least for now.

UiPath's user community is definitely helpful. Usually, I'd look it up there first when we run into a problem.

Our team has used UiPath Academy courses. Academy courses were really helpful in giving us a good start to have a good foundation. Although we use UiPath to develop our scenarios, having that Academy access and going through the training definitely helped us get up to speed very quickly.

I definitely want some improvement on the documentation of the understanding side.

Maybe they should build more out-of-the-box apps rather than companies building their own implementation from scratch and maybe build them as a product on top of the platform. That would save time in implementation.

We're a SAP shop, so I'm looking more at what scenarios can be pre-booked using UiPath. I know there are some escalators that are there in SAP. However, they are not production ready, in my view. That area definitely can be improved since they're all Excel-based, and they're more proof of concept rather than production ready.

I've been using the solution for almost two years. 

Stability is one area where I'm really concerned. Sometimes it does behave erratically and I have to stop everything, and deploy it again, and it works fine. Therefore, I have some concerns about how it's going to scale out when there is a very high volume.

I'm concerned that we may have issues with scalability as it can behave erratically, and I have to stop and redeploy it.

For example, right now, we have a very small implementation. We will be implementing this order automation for 15 countries with a lot of customers. So I have concerns about how UiPath will scale out to these countries plus even more countries that I am planning to implement as well. What will be the process, what will the performance impact, and how is it going to behave? I do have concerns there right now.

I have dealt with technical support a few times. That said, most of the time, I could figure out the problem myself. There is one problem that I'm still dealing with in terms of technical support, and it's been ongoing. They have involved the product team to help resolve that particular issue. I have to say that I'm not thrilled with the support that I got.

Neutral

We did not previously use a different solution. We used to do everything manually.

I lead our automation implementation. For our treasury, it was easy; however, for the automation we are going live with in October, the process is a bit more complex. 

Our implementation strategy involved starting small and starting with a couple of use cases. I decided to use UiPath as our partner to cover our bases since I wanted to ensure we have a good foundation with best practices before we start doing anything in-house.

We had UiPath assist us with the initial implementation. The experience was pretty good. There were some challenges to deal with in terms of having a robust solution with good logging and notifications. That definitely didn't happen right off the bat. That said, overall, it was an okay process. 

We are definitely seeing an ROI. For example, we are saving 60 hours every month, and it's a small implementation. With order automation, we are going to save a lot of time. I don't have the exact numbers yet. However, we are positive about the outcomes we expect.

I was quite surprised at the pricing. We decided to implement action forms, and at that time, I was not aware that there is a separate licensing. It's difficult sometimes when you have to go back to your finance team or the sponsor and tell them that you need more money. Any licensing requirement has to be clear up front rather than being revealed later. I'm not worried about the cost, it's more about knowing what license we need, and in my implementation, we had quite a few mishaps related to licenses.

We looked at a couple of other products.

I don't want to go into what products we looked at. However, I can definitely say the main criterion behind selecting UiPath was its ease of use. We did a proof of concept in-house without any help. That was my main criterion for making a decision. 

Also, there's a good product path in terms of what they're doing next. UiPath is a market leader. We wanted to go with a solution that not only meets our needs for now but also is taking the effort, time, and money in building the product and bringing new capabilities.

We're fairly new to the process and have yet to get into using UiPath for a good cause.

We aren't using the AI functionality yet.

I'd advise potential users to do their homework. Look at other products and make the decision based on what capabilities you are looking at. I will say don't look at only one scenario. Look at the overall picture. Look at what your future plans are. I still believe UiPath is the best product when it comes to RPA. However, you have got to look at the whole picture at the outset.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. There are a lot of good things happening. It's very easy to use, and UiPath has a very good product roadmap. That's the key for me. Especially with AI, process mining, cost mining, et cetera, they're really going to help any company that signs on.

Our company uses the solution for documentation understanding, email automation, and onboarding. Many of our use cases include AbbVie. 

Our company has saved thousands of hours by automating accounting processes. Staff no longer have to drudge through manual tasks and that is meaningful to them so they do better work. 

The solution provides ease of access for users with limited knowledge. One of our high-level developers can code it for a user who can maintain it with limited coding knowledge. The solution is much easier to use than having an actual coded application. 

For example, a developer can build out a use case that involves emailing invoices and includes labels and documentation. The product can then be handed off to a user who does not have coding knowledge because all needed information is included for maintenance and administration. 

There is a bit of a learning curve to the solution because it is like coding. If you are a coder it will be easy but you cannot dive very deep into the code. The way you go about the architecting process is very different from other tools because you have to lay out the flow in a certain way. 

Reusability is not as great as straight coding where you can recall functions and methods. The solution requires a whole workflow that can become a bit tedious when processes expand too much. 

Features I have wanted such as enhanced process mining and others have been shown in the new preview so are already forthcoming. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The stability is pretty good and the solution has not shut down. I have experienced a few crashes, but they are probably caused by my own computer.

The scalability depends on how you develop it. If you develop it to be scalable, then it will be scalable. In terms of Orchestrator, the platform is pretty good at scaling because it allows you to keep deploying it and branching out. 

The Community is great and operates similarly to Stack Overflow's community. Users have their own niche knowledge and you can query them if you ever need anything. This is a good way to expand your own knowledge base. 

I took the Academy's courses when I first started using the solution so haven't learned the new features yet. Over normal coursework, you learn best practices that enable you to pick up the tool faster, such as how to document process flow or how to set up from a high-level perspective. 

I have not needed technical support. 

I have not used other solutions. 

The setup is pretty easy and straightforward. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

We always hope to see ROI in every process. We have realized a bunch of ROI on deployed items and hopefully will see more. 

For our provisioning process, we save a few hours per person each day. 

Our company did not evaluate other options. 

I advise others to try out the solution. It is really good software and has helped a bunch of people to switch careers. For example, I used to be an actual developer but now I do RPA. The solution is an industry leader so it is a good idea to try it out at least once.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our company uses the solution to understand documents, process invoices, move data from one system to another, conduct background investigations, and other day-to-day use cases for federal and state offices. 

For one use case, we built a sandbox for malware analysis using the bot. 

For another use case, we scan thousands of resumes to find an individual with a specific skill set. 

We have completed 90 automations with mostly attended bots that we have built. We are not using AI much right now, but plan to use it to solve problems in the future. 

The solution can be used across systems or with more generic use cases. 

It is easy to go to the code level and write automations that only require a couple of lines of code.

Training materials should include behind-the-scenes information such as what goes on underneath the infrastructure and how components interact with each other. This type of information matters more to solution architects than high-level buildings or components. 

The solution has a few bugs that need to be worked out. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The stability has been good so far but we do not have much volume. We handle diverse implementations that include five to ten bots. We do not yet have the load to fully rate performance. 

The solution is a good platform for scalability and accommodates multiple nodes. 

Technical support has been pretty good and we have a direct contact who is very responsive. It sometimes takes a day or two to make contact, so technical support is rated a nine out of ten because there is room for improvement. 

The user community is helpful and it is easy to find answers or at least a direction for solving issues. 

Our team utilizes the Academy for certifications and finds it useful because it provides high-level information about features. 

Positive

We did not use another solution. 

The setup is cumbersome for on-premises because documentation is outdated or instructions are not clear so we have to get clarity from support. 

The setup for SaaS is easy because you can log in and start using it immediately. 

We implement the solution in-house using a hybrid model. Some federal government offices are very particular about exposed data so we use on-premises for them. Others are more open so we prefer to use the SaaS platform. 

We also work with many business groups to promote RPA and set up their infrastructure environments in the solution. 

The solution's ROI is that it saves time, eliminates errors, and reduces repetition. Tasks that used to take days are now completed within seconds or hours. 

The solution is more expensive than Power Platform which offers many connectors to third parties. 

For example, an unattended bot costs $50 per month on Power Platform so it makes sense for developers who work on the Microsoft Platform. 

The solution can run $10,000 per year. 

Prior to using the solution, we looked at Automation Anywhere but did not enjoy developing with it.

Many other products such as ServiceNow, Pega, or SAP have RPA but use their own domains. They also require many blocks of code to automate. 

We will be looking at Power Platform's next iteration because we are not sure about the future of the solution's partnership with Microsoft. 

When implementing the solution, go small first. Do not jump directly to the most complex case for automation or you will get lost and think the solution is ineffective. 

Start by building small workflows, realizing the gains, and slowly increasing performance. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

My organization is an outsourcing company. We work with various clients. So, we have many use cases. The current use case I'm working on is related to invoice processing.

We don't use attended automation. We use its AI functions a bit. Usually, we work with document understanding.

Currently, I'm using the latest version. It is deployed on the cloud and on-premises. It is the UiPath cloud.

It is easy and fast to build automation using UiPath. All of our automations are created with UiPath. Usually, we do automation for SLA purposes. Most of the time, the clients don't have enough resources or humans to do the job, and they need automation to improve the SLAs.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with the process analysis, robot building, and monitoring of automations. It is good for my company. With these benefits, we can implement it and help with the monitoring.

It has reduced a lot of human error. For example, in the project that I'm working on, people were putting the invoice information on a daily basis. There were more than 20 invoices per day, and each invoice had more than 100 line items. Humans would do a lot of mistyping on the number of packages or the number of items in the package. After we applied the document understanding solution there, we can handle around 90% of invoices, and all of them are correct.

It has absolutely saved us time. It has probably saved us more than 20% of the time. People now have more time.

I feel comfortable with UiPath. The thing that I like most is that UiPath has a very large community and a large ecosystem. So, it is easy to connect with other applications or platforms.

UiPath Apps is a great feature, but it still needs time to evolve. They need to add more features. It hasn't increased the number of automations we can create while reducing the time it takes to create them.

I don't like the sequence feature in the UiPath. It is difficult to analyze and read the code.

The variable management is really messy. When I look at the code, I don't know where the variable is and in which scope.

I have been using this solution for around five years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have had three enterprises that are really big with more than 1,000 people. The others are small companies.

In our organization, we have 12 people working with it.

I haven't contacted their support. I have been using UiPath's support indirectly. I just put a question on the community forum, and they answer it very fast.

In the previous version of UiPath, it was a nightmare to set it up, but now, it is really comfortable and convenient. Overall, it is fast, but the deployment duration also depends on the solution. If you design a good solution and follow the best practices, it is really fast. It takes a couple of hours at the most.

We always try to split a project into small parts so that we can test each part and apply it easily. I have seen that many people create very big projects, but when you complete them, you cannot test them. It takes a lot of testing from end to end, and we still can't test it completely. That's why we try to split a project into small parts. We can test each part independently, and after the integration, we can deploy with high confidence.

I am not sure how long it takes for our clients to see its benefits after we deploy it for them.

We have a maximum of five people for deployment and maintenance. We sometimes have issues with the infrastructure. In many cases, the infrastructure is handled by the client, and there is no support or cooperation between the RPA department and the IT department. Usually, they will be late, or they did not check our requirements to deploy the bot.

If you use the cloud model of the UiPath, it will reduce a lot of the total cost.

Its AI functionality hasn't enabled us much to automate more processes. Most of the time, when we propose those functions, we don't have an agreement with the client because of the license price. Currently, the license price is the major obstacle.

My advice would be to contact the UiPath sales team directly. I know that they have different license models for different clients and regions.

I would advise following the UiPath Academy and their best practices. That is enough.

They provide very valuable templates for automation purposes. It depends on your purpose, but you can apply the ones that are already there.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Initially, we had some manual test cases running in the background, where we tried to call our UI and do end-to-end testing of the login, checkout, etc. We now automate end-to-end testing using UiPath to reduce the workload. We use UiPath for process analysis and making robots, but not for monitoring. We already have other tools in our system to monitor each and every step of our process

We work in a hybrid environment, but we're increasingly cloud-based. We are not driving as much traffic to our on-premises system. 

We were hiring developers to write test cases and perform automation for us. UiPath significantly reduced the amount of employee labor needed while cutting down on human error. The error count in our system dropped by around 10 to 15 percent. 

This is a considerable win for us. Our clients are happier because they see fewer errors in production. End-to-end automation helps us deliver quality work to our customers. UiPath helps us analyze every connected case with automated robot testing. 

UiPath has a simple, creative UI, where you can check on all the automated tools. Everything is well documented, and you can easily get support from the UiPath team. Whenever we were stuck, their team was always there to support us. The community is huge and powerful. 

The entire process of setting up automations is smooth. We could easily deploy each case on our cloud platform and make things work.

We aren't scaling up UiPath because it doesn't provide a satisfactory way to log and monitor data. Instead, we use other tools like Automation Anywhere for large-scale operations in our production environment. We're building solutions that can handle a huge amount of data so we can monitor real-time issues. I don't think UiPath solves that case for us.

We've been using UiPath for around a year.

We faced some issues with scalability, so we use another RPA in production. 

I rate UiPath's support nine out of ten. We always get a response within six hours. UiPath also has a massive user community, so you can get instant support from anyone. We faced some issues when we built our first robots, so we got help from the community. When someone else has problems, we try to help them. 

Working in the community, you are recognized for your support, and you can learn a lot from others. There are some complex things about using UiPath that we don't understand. 

The UiPath community is friendly, and they respond quickly. At most, it takes around six hours to get an answer from the community, based on our experience. I believe that anyone who adopts UiPath will learn so much from the community.

Positive

We deployed UiPath through a vendor provider who helped us through the entire installation and everything in our cloud environment. Initially, we tried UiPath in our testing environment. Once we saw that it was stable and improved our productivity, we moved it to our production environment with excellent results. It took 10 months for us to deploy UiPath fully. 

We had two people working on the deployment. One managed the installation, while the second person handled monitoring and other development areas. 

We had two developers working 20 hours a week writing test cases manually, so UiPath saves us 40 hours of labor costs. However, we spend about that much on UiPath when you factor in licensing, infrastructure costs, and other expenses. The value we see is from the reduction in human error. 

I rate UiPath eight out of ten. I deduct two points because of the shortcomings in terms of scalability and logging. It's a nice-to-have solution in our case. I recommend trying UiPath out and seeing if it's suitable for your use case. You should go for it if it fits. It's not too costly and it will reduce human error while improving the quality of your product.  

Our use case for this solution is for hosting and deployment purposes of web applications.

We are using the latest version.

UiPath is a good solution for automation. Our time management has improved by using the UiPath solution. On a monthly basis, it reduces one week of a developer's time.

It helps reduce human error. 99% of errors can be avoided by using this solution.

It has a very good, user-friendly user interface. This is its best feature - it is very easy to use. There is not much complexity when using it. For the beginners, this is also good.

For building automations, we can use a task manager because we also have job management or support in the development phase. We can apply first-in, first-out with work in UiPath.

For the automation, we do not require anything to be manual. We only need to set up the configuration. UiPath follows the instructions given by the developer or engineer. It automatically follows the instructions from end-to-end given in a set of files. 

The unattended automation helps improve our time management.

We are using the solution's AI functionality, which helps us automate more things. Now, nothing is complex. We just need to drag and drop things to create a flow. Everything is done automatically by the automation. It reduces our effort on these types of things.

They could make the solution better by improving the latency.

The community can be increased and enhanced. That way, if we are facing an issue and need an easy solution, we can then use the community.

I have been using it for a year.

It is capable of doing various tasks at the same time.

We have not experienced any downtime or issues.

It is scalable. We can add any number of users. This is the most scalable solution that we are using.

The technical support is good. I would rate them as eight out of 10.

We would like them to increase the community. That way, if we need 24/7 tech support due to an error or issue, we can resolve it as soon as possible.

Positive

We did not previously use another solution.

The deployment was neither straightforward nor complex. Some skills are required, i.e., basic courses are required for a developer or engineer using this solution. For a person who has hands-on experience with it, the deployment will be simple for them.

The AI functionality saves time and reduces the number of errors. It also reduces our costs in terms of human resources. It has reduced our costs by thousands of dollars.

We have a team who decides the software that we use. They chose UiPath because it was better than the other competitors. They conclude that UiPath was the best one, which is why we use it.

I would rate UiPath as nine out of 10.

We have two use cases.

One is for our claim accessing process, for which I have developed a process for logging into the client's application. It includes launching the browser and getting logged into the application by entering the username and password and handling two-step verification. Handling that requires some logic. Once logged in, it navigates to the claim status feed and selects the organization's and payer's details. It then enters the required details of the patients. These details are given by the client in an Excel document that the process reads. It searches for the values, one-by-one. If there is no record for the patient whose details are entered, it will throw an error stating that there are no claims present. It captures such exceptions and records them in a separate Excel file.

If that person's claim is present, it fetches 25 to 35 key details from that record and they are written to an Excel document. Once the process is done, the Excels will be sent as email attachments to the client.

The second process that I am currently developing is one where I need to get the data from Google Sheets. This process involves four or five practice management systems. It has to log into each practice management system and, for each one, it needs to schedule appointments based on the data present in the Google Sheet. The process involves navigating to the respective screens, filtering the details, and entering them in a CSV file. Based on that file, we have all the data related to patients' records. The process checks the patients' payment records. There are exception-handling routines and any errors are noted in an Excel sheet. Once all the patients' records have been completed, it closes the application and sends the data to the respective clients. It produces a log file in Excel as an attachment, as well.

Automation has definitely saved us time and money. For example, for data entry, if a person takes around eight hours per day to complete and upload about 200 sets of data, a bot can easily upload around 3,000 to 4,000 sets per day. It reduces the amount of time to get data uploaded. If a person uploads one record in three minutes, the bot can upload the same data in about 30 to 40 seconds. The bot provides much greater time- and cost-efficiency. It speeds up digital transformation.

It has also reduced human error. Among those 200 records that a person can upload per day, mistakes may happen in 10 to 15 records. Bots don't do things incorrectly at any point in time. Values are entered correctly in each field.

As a result, it frees up employee time. If a bot runs for eight hours, a person only has to look at it for a little while, because a bot will definitely do the process perfectly. That means we don't need a human to dedicate much time watching something run end-to-end. If the bot does the process properly for four records, it will definitely do the next 4000 records correctly as well. So there is not much time required of a human to watch the bot.

On the basis of costs in India, where I work, if a person earns 30,000 per month, the cost of the process they work on is 360,000 per year. A bot for the same process may cost 150,000 or 200,000 only. Automating is more cost-efficient than hiring a person to work on the process.

Among the most valuable features is the ability to read Excel and Word documents with API calls.

In the Google platform, I need to generate security-related things like an API key and an API secure code. That enables me to get the data into UiPath. The product is built such that only if all the security requirements are properly done am I able to get the required data.

UiPath is also the best tool for a beginner or someone who has no knowledge of programming. It is easy to learn quickly and to understand. You can get working in it much more quickly than if you had to acquire a programming background.

I would rate the ease of building an automation at 3.8 out of five, as I have only been working in UiPath for the past 11 months. I am now able to understand everything and can design the kinds of processes I need to build. There are many courses available on their website in the UiPath Academy where they completely show you how to do things. Within a short period of time—I spent the first three months in the UiPath Academy—I was able to understand things clearly, including descriptions of the Properties panels and every field. I understand the uses of these Properties.

Also, many of the Activities are pre-built, but if any activities or logical processes are not available, I can get them through third-party packages that are in the UiPath Marketplace. I am able to build automations quickly. In the worst-case scenario, if it's a large project, I can develop that project within two months.

I have used the AI functionality for PDF automations. In these processes, the bot is able to capture the data properly about 70 to 80 percent of the time. But if a document is not proper or it isn't handled the right way, the bot struggles to get the required data. UiPath has to work on this aspect so that the bot will be able to completely capture the data.

There is also room for improvement in the area of third-party integrations. In the last week I have gone through a video for an integration service, but it did not show things end-to-end. Rather, they just explained the connection details only. After performing the steps they showed, I was not able to get things working properly in my process.

I have been using UiPath for around 11 months.

The stability of UiPath is quite good. In some particular areas, the bot struggles a bit and we have to implement Human in the Loop. Those cases are where the bot can't do certain validations. But overall, the solution is stable and accurate in the results.

The scalability is a four out of five. 

At a certain point, we needed support from UiPath. The solution can be integrated with ABBYY. Getting an AABBYY license doesn't happen just like that. You need to get a trial license and it's a long process. We needed support from the UiPath team to get it done.

You can try to get a solution from the UiPath forum or from the documentation sections, but the UiPath support is the best. I have raised three or four support tickets over the year and they have helped me through each issue, completely, to the end. They respond within 24 hours. When you explain your issue to them, they create a step-by-step process to sort it out. And once I solved the issues, they inspected what I had done.

Positive

I used Microsoft Power Automate. I switched because Power Automate is not very user-friendly when compared with UiPath. And when it comes to integrations in the Microsoft product, most of the connectors are still in the preview state. In UiPath, all the integrations are active and enable you to get the desired result. Also, the Microsoft community does not have many active people handling it. With the UiPath community, you get an immediate response for any issue you have posted.

I use the UiPath forums if I have an issue and I'm unable to find a solution or develop my process. If I post it on the forum, in a maximum of two minutes I'll get an email response from other UiPath users, as well as from senior users who may have two or three years' experience. They politely answer my issues. I have also provided solutions to questions in the forum over the past two months. UiPath's user community is absolutely the best one.

The initial setup is completely easy and straightforward. It is just like installing software in a system by clicking "next, next, next." At the end of it, you have Studio in your system. 

If you need to allocate a particular system to Orchestrator, even that is a very simple process and there are videos available on the internet that show you how to set up the process quickly.

Instead of giving a monthly salary to a person, you can get a bot on a yearly basis. It is cost-efficient and will save you money. You'll also get a more accurate and stable result than if you had a human work on it.

Pricing is based on your process. If your process is fairly simple, it will not cost much.

UiPath has enabled me to build automations much more quickly when compared to other tools. If you go with Blue Prism or Automation Anywhere, you need to have some programming language skills to implement things. But UiPath is completely drag-and-drop.

I looked online at which is the best tool. I looked at many details, what each product provides, and decided that UiPath is a better solution as an automation tool.

Overall, UiPath has the best user community and the best, detailed videos. It is easy to understand, there is no coding at all, and even a beginner can create a process in a short period of time. It is also easily integratable. These are the points where it stands out against any other tools.

For us, in some use cases, end-to-end automation means a need for Human in the Loop. There are certain points where the bot is not able to validate things and a human is needed to verify whether the bot has done things properly or not. But bots are able to process 90 percent of an end-to-end process. For monitoring, UiPath has Orchestrator. If any error occurs, the data is immediately updated in Orchestrator and you can easily see the error and the cause, and you can easily resolve it.

In the UiPath Academy, UiPath offers the best content for each module and, after each video, there is a quiz so that we can show we have understood what we have learned from the video. There are also activities and a practice session where we can implement the use cases by practicing them in Studio. If we are stuck at any point after the practice, they have a solution area where they explain the steps you need to implement in Studio to get the desired results. They give sample workflows as well. I don't think any other software tool does this. They even provide detailed, step-by-step videos for third-party integrations.