UiPath Platform Reviews

We have licenses for 15 robots and they are running internal processes. We develop them using UiPath Studio and we only use unattended automation.

Our primary use case, which is 70% of what we have automated, is related to our booking system. Instead of having 10 agents who handle the booking or creating the reservations, the work is done by the robots. Sometimes, bookings are very simple where you have just airfare or the hotel, but in our case, it's quite complex. We call it dynamic packaging, which will have a flight component, you can have a hotel component, different attractions, meal options, a rental car, and more. Instead of entering all of the options manually, which can take up to 10 minutes or 15 minutes just to create a single booking. It is similar when we perform other tasks, such as making a payment. These things are normally done in our target system. I have created robots and workflows in UiPath that are triggered by the database, and they complete these tasks automatically. We have 15 robots conducting the job.

The second use case replaces the agent when once we get all information from the outside system using a .NET application and store it in the database, it creates parameters for the robots to make a booking or reservation at Universal Studios for attractions.

The third use case covers all of Europe and it is a completely automated car booking system. 

Basically, our use cases are all about travel and booking systems for Universal Studios, general dynamic packaging, and car rentals.

UiPath has definitely improved the way our organization functions. It normally takes one agent approximately six hours to create reservations in the booking system manually, and now the job is left to RPA with UiPath workflows. It saves between 40% and 50% of the agent's time, leaving them time to work on something different.

The accuracy of tasks has been improved because everything is data-driven, and there is no problem that comes from human error. The system is almost bulletproof; if you send garbage in then you get garbage out but definitely, there are no human mistakes. For example, instead of entering the name of the customer, it comes straight from the database. The same is true for options like the times of picking up and dropping off your car. The only problem that we have is not related to RPA; it's the case where the target system is not responsive. For example, if you're moving from one screen to another and the system doesn't respond, then we are notified via an alert. 

The improved accuracy and shorter time to complete tasks, freeing up resources for other jobs, translate to money saved. Given that our processes are complex, the automation of them takes a load off of our end-users. In some cases, they have to perform data entry in several different systems. For example, in order to make a booking, they have to use three different systems with three different interfaces.

With RPA, in general, there is also a fear that jobs will be lost but when you're always swamped at work, including overtime, night shifts, and working on weekends, RPA is a big help. 

UiPath has helped to reduce our hardware footprint by between 20% and 30%. We now have only 15 virtual machines running instead of 15 physical desktops. The amount of hardware required to operate the business is directly correlated to the number of human operators and the software that is running.

UiPath has saved us significantly in terms of costs, primarily because of the manpower we used to have for the booking reservation system. It frees up resources for the agents, IT staff, and people from various departments. For example, we have group reservation systems for car booking, flight booking, and others. UiPath has made an impact in all of these places and the cost saving is very beneficial. In the first year, we saved over $100,000 on the booking systems. After the initial project in the first year, two or three more systems were built, for a savings of $300,000 annually before COVID.

In terms of the time we are saving, it is quite low these days because of the COVID-19 travel restrictions. Pre-COVID, we were saving approximately 80 hours per day. The reclaimed time for our employees is now available for them to work on higher-value work. The savings is not only from the data entry but for troubleshooting errors, which no longer needs to be done.

We have offices in Montreal, Vancouver, and Toronto, and the majority of agents are stationed in Montreal. I am working in the Toronto location, so I cannot comment on the majority in terms of how employee satisfaction has improved. What I have heard from the executive management is that more people are happy because they are able to better focus on what they want to do. This is especially true because they do not have to spend many hours troubleshooting trivial issues. Instead, they are concentrating on higher-value work.

We are using approximately 70% of all of the activities that are available in UiPath. These include web scraping and data entry, where the information is stored in a database. We also perform database queries.

The biggest benefit that we have from UiPath comes from using the API.

The features that we use most often are database communication, scraping, and PDF functions. The only features that we don't use are those related to Excel, for spreadsheets.

For smaller projects, we are only passing parameters from .NET applications but in the newer projects, we are using features such as database communication and data scraping.

The ease of building automations is great. When I talk about UiPath, I am usually referring to Studio, which has a very intuitive and easy-to-use interface, yet it is very powerful. This is something that has improved with the help of forums and tutorials. In 2016, it was more difficult because there were really no forums so we had to contact the head office in Bucharest, Romania when we needed help. Getting a demo had to be done in the very early hours and there was lots of communication back and forth. It was a struggle to find solutions, although to be fair, they've been very helpful. These days, it is very easy to use because there are numerous examples, and UiPath Academy is available, along with other resources.

We have been using the UiPath Apps feature and it has helped with the ease and time required for creating automation. Everything has improved over the past several years, as in the past, there were no examples or tutorials available. There was no manual and it was very technical. At the time, you definitely needed programming knowledge in order to handle some of the scenarios. It was at times like this that we relied on support from Bucharest.

Even today, there are only a couple of programmers in the company who develop the bots. Even with the Apps feature, I don't think that the end-users are ready, although this may be because of the way that our organization is structured. Everything is given to the IT department because our scenarios are very complex, and not a simple case of data entry or something like that. With such complex solutions, it is definitely too difficult for our end-users.

There are a few areas that need to be improved, one of which we have already raised with the salesperson and technical team.

The first area that needs improvement is backward compatibility. If you have a newer version of the UiPath Studio or any product, then quite often, if you're a year behind or so, you cannot compile the whole project. This means that you have to rebuild system modules. It's not like a Microsoft product that is always backward compatible. For us, that is a huge obstacle because sometimes, we have to rewrite entire workflows. In our case, this is a massive undertaking that will take three or four months to complete. This is the main issue for us and it doesn't happen with minor release updates, but with major ones, we have to rewrite the entire project because it doesn't compile.

The licensing should be more flexible and more affordable.

We used to be able to integrate with .NET applications, where all of the business rules reside, and then invoke robots or workflows from there. Now, that capability has been removed, so we have to use Orchestrator. Converting our projects requires a lot of work because we have to move all of the business logic to the UiPath workflow. It is not an ideal situation for us because keeping the business logic inside our .NET applications is more flexible and more scalable.

When I was taking some UiPath Academy courses, I noticed that they gave us more complex tasks. There were expert-level examples, but the junior examples are missing. Furthermore, they give you high-end, very technical guides, but there are not really any examples. This means that you really have to dig and use the forums and ask people questions. Essentially, you have to try and find the solutions by yourself.

In general, if you have very large and complex solutions as we do, the overall workflow layout could be improved because navigating through the network components can be very inconvenient. You can still see the high-level of the workflow, but not a detailed one. It may take you several minutes to get to the component you were looking for. In terms of navigation, the mapping solution could definitely be improved. There are always workarounds. What you can do in this case is use the flow charts with the sequencing module to break it down to a more general view. This makes it faster to get to the module that you want to improve or fix.

I am a Senior Lead Developer in my company, and I have been using UiPath since 2016. I was one of the very early UiPath users.

Stability-wise, we haven't really found any issues lately.

In the earlier versions, from 2016 and 2017, there were some issues that were never resolved by the UiPath team. The newer versions, especially while performing web scraping, are much more stable. Once it was deployed, we haven't seen any issues with the .NET applications.

Instability in our use case is the result of the target system; for example, the one that is operated by Universal Studios. If they are unresponsive for perhaps 20 or 30 seconds and the robot is expecting to see a certain screen, especially when it normally only takes two or three seconds to move from one screen to the other after submitting a request, it is going to cause a problem. However, that's not the fault of UiPath or RPA in general, but a fault of the source or target system.

I estimate that with all things considered, UiPath is 99.9% stable.

UiPath is very scalable. We are a mid-sized company with approximately 200 to 250 employees.

There are three or four of us who have hands-on experience with the product, and there are between 100 and 110 end-users. This includes four or five departments spread across three different locations. Our end-users are primarily business users.

Our goal is to increase our usage of UiPath but we are currently downsizing due to the COVID situation. We have some projects in mind, but we have to wait to see what happens with the travel industry. With approximately 50% of our employees laid off, no progress will be made. However, down the road when we get back on track, we plan to use other areas of the system. That will include manipulating spreadsheets, data entry, interoperability with other systems, and interfacing with it.

The technical support is definitely good, although there were some issues that never got resolved. The situation is that we are based in Canada and our salesperson from Toronto organizes the meeting with the technical staff from New York in the US. There were times when they couldn't help us because the majority of them had been with UiPath for two to three years. They didn't understand how things were working back in 2016, '17, or '18, well enough. Ultimately, they never found a person who could help us and to me, that is not really acceptable in terms of finding a workaround or the fastest approach to resolve the backward compatibility and .NET Integration.

What we needed was somebody with five or six years of experience and they could simply not find one.

We had some basic automation running prior to UiPath, but it was native SQL and .NET applications. An example is that we were using scaping options available in Microsoft applications, but it wasn't really RPA. UiPath has definitely helped us to reduce the costs of our automation operations. Everything is now run from one application, and you can use the workflows to collaborate between databases, spreadsheets, and booking reservations. Basically, it's end-to-end in terms of the development lifecycle because originally, our tasks were only partly automated.

If you consider automated testing solutions then we were using Selenium for things such as load-testing, in a previous company. I had no experience with a full RPA solution before UiPath in 2016.

In our early stages of automation, the task would start and then only get to a certain point before a different application had to pick it up. We had a scheduler that was responsible for this. The scheduler would see the partly completed task, then take it and put it somewhere else for a third application to take over. Now, all of this is done using the UiPath API.

Specifically, in terms of overhead operations, UiPath has saved us approximately 80 hours a day, which translates to between $4,000 and $5,000 per day, just in one department. If you multiply this by 30 days then it is a lot of money. Given that it is a ballpark figure for just a single department, it could be even more.

Back when we first installed UiPath, it was complex. But now, it is much easier because they have grown. It is much easier than it was five years ago, although, at the same time, we haven't had many issues in the process of implementing and rolling out our solutions.

Our deployment is on-premises and entirely private.

These days, it takes less than a day to deploy. In 2016, it took us almost a week for much simpler deployments because there was no proper documentation. Fortunately, at the time, we got lots of help from the technical staff in Romania.

When we first started with UiPath, it was not even close to what it's today. It was much difficult to create a strategy because it more or less was a black box. We purchased the product and there was only UiPath Studio, nothing else. There was virtually no documentation and more or less, everything was left to us, our team, to develop this strategy.

Implementing it was more of a trial and error process than it is today. Finally, we did it. We moved our automations from the development environment to the staging environment, and then finally into the production environment. Now, it's pretty stable. At the time, however, it was pretty cumbersome and difficult because there was no proper documentation or guidance from UiPath. Nowadays, it's pretty simple.

There are three of us in the company who are responsible for deployment and maintenance. We also handle the monitoring, implementation, troubleshooting, and updating of the product and robots.

We also have an infrastructure team that is outsourced from a company in Toronto, Canada, called Carbon60. Our experience with them has been a little shaky, but we are handling it okay. They could not really help us as much with the initial setup of UiPath because they did not have experience with RPA. We gave them the specs required for our infrastructure, and they set it up. Overall, approximately 90% of the setup was our responsibility.

Compared to four or five years ago, the licensing in terms of price is less flexible and less affordable. Recently, because of the COVID situation, we need 15 robots. Ideally, we could use five robots and Orchestrator instead, and pay the difference, but the vendor refused to take this offer.

We are currently using the Community Version of Orchestrator for training purposes.

When we started looking at UiPath, they had less than 100 customers in the world. We had been looking at three different options that included UiPath, Blue Prism, and one other one. In our case, we were using a legacy application that was Java applet-based, and the other products were not able to handle that well.

From what I recall, back in 2016, UiPath was the only option that supported Java applet-based automation. We needed the functionality because one of our internal applications was not web-based, but Java applet-based, and depended on it. It did not work immediately and there were some workarounds, but with some help from the UiPath technical staff, we were able to handle it. This is the main reason that we ultimately chose UiPath.

Essentially, UiPath was the only option that was able to handle Java applet automation. With that covering the front end, we automated the whole process.

In the future, because UiPath was not able to handle the legacy projects that we developed in RPA, we might consider another product like Blue Prism. We would assess potential solutions based on backward compatibility.

We have been thinking about using the Orchestrator with the cloud option, but because of the current world situation, especially because we are in the travel industry, our income has been significantly reduced. At this point, we are more or less in survival mode, so we decided to stay as-is.

We were also supposed to get Orchestrator, the latest web developer, and a production license but we gave up because we cannot afford it at the moment. Travel may be idle right now but post-COVID, which hopefully is next year or by end of this year, we're going to get the official Orchestrator license.

Originally, we were using .NET applications, which is the technology that has driven the business. It's huge, and with the newer versions of UiPath, it is no longer possible because we have to use Orchestrator. At this time, we are more or less working on a workaround and it's a massive project that is probably going to take six or seven months to complete.

We are not using the AI functionality yet, although it is something that we're planning to look into, eventually.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using UiPath is how much time was consumed by our manual processes. Definitely, we have freed up resources for our business team. In terms of accuracy, there are no human errors anymore. Consequently, we can free up between 30% and 40% of our agents' time in terms of analysis and billing. In summary, the biggest thing that I have learned is that using RPA is about improving accuracy and reliability.

My advice for anybody who is implementing UiPath is to start with the training. These days, especially younger developers, people are very keen to jump on developing RPA and they're doing this stuff without using Academy or other training. Rather than do that, I suggest people get familiar with the product and use the training material first. Use the examples that are provided because the UiPath Academy is amazing in terms of that.

In summary, this product has a very intuitive and powerful interface. There are very good examples and scenarios on the UiPath Academy website, and technical support is very helpful. You can also find lots of good examples in the community forums. There used to be only one OCR option, and now there are two different flavors of OCR, which is definitely one of the pros. However, the major cons are backward compatibility and licensing in terms of flexibility and affordability. We also lost some of the functionality for .NET integration, which was a problem for us because the capabilities are simply gone.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I have worked on multiple use cases with UiPath dealing with SAP, SharePoint, or a web application. We had to extract the data and do some automation of data processing. We were taking data from one environment, such as from an Excel sheet, and processing it. These were the use cases for which we used UiPath extensively.

In addition to app integration, there were use cases related to various frameworks such as REframework and State Machines. We used the REframework at the enterprise level to be able to handle exceptions and bot failures and make automation healthy, robust, and steady.

We have also done automation for a healthcare department for claim processing.

UiPath saves the execution time of processes running in the production. If a process was taking three to four hours previously, with UiPath automation, it can be completed within an hour with better exception handling capability and less dependency. It saves 50% time.

UiPath is capable of handling the complexities involved in taking data from different environments. It is also capable of exception handling. If any application has limited functionality, we can use UiPath for automation with that particular application. With advanced selectors and linked queries, we can get the data from the application or interact with the application.

UiPath Document Understanding has helped to reduce the data entry work and physical copies of documents.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. For every organization, it is very important that automation is robust enough.

UiPath can help minimize your on-premises footprint. It depends on whether you plan to deploy your automation on the cloud or on-prem. On-prem has various challenges and restrictions, but it also has benefits.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation without requiring expensive or complex application upgrades, or IT application support. App integrations are advanced and robust. It is plug-and-play. You can integrate with Excel, Outlook, SharePoint, SAP, and various databases. There are pre-loaded activities. You can integrate with GitLab or GitHub. It has inbuilt activities for enterprise-level applications.

UiPath reduces human errors, but it also depends upon the process. It depends on how much interaction is required and what exception rates are there. When everything has been identified, it can reduce errors by more than 70%.

The first feature that I like is the exception-handling capability. The second feature is the REframework provided by them, and the third feature would be the Orchestrator functions. There is also the feasibility provided to monitor the ports and deploy the code. There is monitoring, retrieving, and all those things. We can use the web or mobile application. These are the key features of UiPath.

For handling complex scenarios, REframework is good. It has good exception handling and in-built mechanisms.

The certification can be made more affordable.

In terms of features, we get regular updates, and AI has recently been integrated. As of now, I do not have an area of improvement. They have already improved the functionality of Orchestrator. As compared to two or three years ago, Orchestrator now offers different functionalities and services. There is a difference, and it has improved.

I have been using UiPath for more than three years.

It is stable. Our organization has licenses because we cannot upgrade the application in sync with the Community version. The enterprise has to stick to one version for a certain period or whatever tenure has been mentioned in the license. The Community version is the playground for UiPath. They upgrade it, and all the beta version updates are there. They come to know how things are going and what are the responses and challenges.

It is scalable. It is used in multiple departments. The size of the organizations that use UiPath varies. They could be MNCs or startups.

Their support is good. After procuring the licenses, when there is an issue, there is a dedicated support team. They respond well.

The UiPath Community is vast. It provides an opportunity to get help from others. They provide good support, and the MVPs are actively engaged in responding to the queries that people are posting when facing any challenge. We can find relevant information by searching with keywords. It is good.

UiPath Academy has been useful in learning about new topics and new versions.

Neutral

I am quite new to Automation Anywhere, but a better exception-handling mechanism and the ability to interact with various applications make UiPath more unique. The drag-and-drop interface is attractive to people who are not very technical. The user experience is more intuitive.

We have on-premises and cloud deployments. The deployment part takes about a week because we have to prepare the production environment. A week is good enough for the deployment.

The number of people involved in the deployment varies. Support teams are there. Developers are also there. There are also people from the change management team.

Like any other software, it requires maintenance.

I would recommend UiPath to others. Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. It is robust and scalable, but there is always scope for improvement.

We use it to automate repetitive processes. We are also using it to manage people and costs.

I have used it for automation in telecommunication, HR, and finance. I have also done two projects for IT. It is a combination. I have worked on all these different projects.

UiPath helps with cost savings and staff savings. We can use manpower for high-value tasks rather than for repetitive tasks.

UiPath helps with end-to-end automation. I have created end-to-end automation through UiPath. It is a high priority for our company. I have not yet worked on the AI functionality.

UiPath reduces human error. If it is a repetitive task, then bots cannot go wrong. They have already been coded with whatever is required, so human errors are generally not there, but there can be scenarios that have not been covered, and they can result in exceptions. We have to work on them and update the bots so that we do not get the same issues.

UiPath improves accuracy. The teams for whom we have done automation are happy. There are no errors. It improves their efficiency. Bots can work 24/7 or at whatever time they want. There is no dependency on time, which is not the case with humans.

The time savings vary from project to project. On average, if a human takes three hours for a task, a bot would take about ten minutes. UiPath reduces the costs, but I do not have the metrics.

UiPath is very user-friendly. There is ease of use. People can understand it very quickly.

It is very easy to use.  It is very good. There are many people who are uploading learning sessions on YouTube, which are free. It is good to learn from there as well. There are many sources to learn and explore it. There is also a community of UiPath users.

UiPath Academy has complete courses for developers and business analysts. A business analyst can follow the course path created for business analysts, and a developer can follow the course path created for developers.

I have been working with UiPath for the last four years.

It is a stable solution. However, if your applications are changing, you will have to do some manipulations in the code. Now they have a feature where you can keep your UI things in your config or in the assets, which is helpful. It is easy.

I do not interact with them directly. There is a team that communicates with their support. 

I know Automation Anywhere, and I have also done a certification on it about four years ago, but I did not work on it. I am not familiar with the features currently in Automation Anywhere, so I cannot compare it with UiPath. I have more experience with UiPath because we got more UiPath projects. We were going to work on a project with Automation Anywhere, but that did not happen.

I have also worked on UiPath Document Understanding, but most of my experience is with general automation.

I have set it up from scratch in one of the companies. It was not that hard. It was easy to set everything up. I was doing it for the first time, so it was a little bit confusing, but it was good. There were forums and YouTube videos. The UiPath team is also available if you need help with installation and what to use. It was good.

After the code is ready, the bot deployment takes 10 to 15 minutes. Three years ago, it used to take us an hour.

I have not worked extensively with any other tool. My experience with UiPath is good, and I would rate it an eight out of ten. I am satisfied with UiPath.

The process is for background checks. There are all kinds of checks such as academic, criminal, and work as well. We receive all the volume through the queues. We are using the citizen developer, StudioX, to get the cases and understand what are the fields and what are the requirements for each one of the cases. The bot will process them accordingly. For example, for each university or academic, there is a different process around the world.

The industry we use it for is HR. What we do with the backgrounds is providing a confirmation to our clients that people have the qualifications that they say they have. It is for data accuracy and consistency within the HR and talent acquisition departments.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has not yet changed what our organization is able to achieve because the project is still a pilot. We are still working a little bit on the environment. We are working through VDI, so it is not straightforward. We cannot just install or put UiPath to work. So far, we have not seen all the results, but we are looking forward to that in the next quarter.

UiPath would definitely free up time or resources for other tasks. We are a team of six people. We are estimating that two of them will be free for new projects. There is about 30% of resource savings.

Our usage is very simple. We have been getting the text, parsing it, and trying to categorize and analyze it. We are not using it fully, but the OCR is very important. This is a package from StudioX. With OCR, we will implement document reviews to make sure that whatever the applicant puts in the form is consistent with the document provided. For example, in academics, it will be your bachelor's or master's certificate.

The value proposition of implementing UiPath is that if we use UiPath and the RPA functionality, instead of passing the process to a BPO, we will start understanding the process and automating it as much as possible. We will have hybrid workflows between humans and robots. We will create capacity. We will have the same number of workers but increased capacity. We will start having conversations with our stakeholders on how to reinvest all of this capacity that has been liberated.

We have had some issues with StudioX. In terms of features, for now, I am pretty happy with UiPath. The requirements of the process to be automated are covered with the basic functionality. It is not exactly UiPath, but for security reasons, we are not able to download packages and use the functionality provided by the community with their developments. It is not on the side of UiPath. 

I was certified as a Citizen three years ago. That is the time frame that I have been using it.

Recently, there was a software update of StudioX. We had some bugs. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of stability.

We are working on moving to the cloud, so scalability will be good.

We have internal support. I do not speak with the vendor. Our internal support system is pretty consistent. They have quick response times.

From my perspective, I do not think we have been using any other solution. We have been with UiPath for about eight years. I cannot confirm the number, but I know that we have been partners for a long time.

We also use AutoHotkey which is something similar but not a replacement. It is a software solution that allows you to reprogram your keyboard and put some functionality in there to automate some of the things, but it is not a replacement.

I was not involved in its deployment. It is on-prem right now. We are migrating the company to the GCP, so there may be some restraints in regard to that. Everything is currently on-prem, but we are working on going to the cloud.

The ROI would be in regard to the capacity. We estimate two FTEs to be free from this project.

We have not yet used UiPath's AI Center and many other features. We are using StudioX, so we are still in the citizen developer mode. We are not using the full functionality with Studio and all that. We have an RPA COE. They have much more complex processes and projects, but we have not used it for that. This UiPath convention has brought a lot of ideas in terms of how to start leveraging it more.

We have also not used UiPath Process Mining and Task Mining. I am working with one of my colleagues who is like a bridge between operations and IT.  We are working together to see how we can better use the technology to improve processes. I have to go team by team, understand the process, and go deeper to see where we can start using this technology. We will have a roadmap of where we need to go.

Overall, I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We use UiPath for marketing, accounting, and sales.

The solution has helped us save time. 

I like the automation capabilities. I particularly like Autopilot and documentation.

We don't currently use AI Center or process mining, but we want to learn more about these features.

The support team could be more responsive and helpful.

I have been using UiPath for one year. 

I would give the stability of UiPath a six out of ten. I've experienced some issues with it in the past.

I would rate the scalability a six out of ten.

I have had to contact the support team on a few occasions. It was a good experience. But the solution could be better with its support team.

Positive

We switched to UiPath because it's a better fit for enterprise companies like ours.

It might not be a good fit for smaller companies. It's a bit expensive for small companies, but it's worth the money for larger companies.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

UiPath is an RPA solution that is very easy to use and local. It's a good choice for companies that are new to RPA or have limited resources for training.

We use the solution to pull documents from audit systems, download documents from document management systems, and grab data from financial management systems. 

I like UiPath's framework. It offers a modern design experience, which makes it easy to do different activities. 

The solution is expensive. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

The product is stable. 

UiPath is scalable. 

UiPath's support is great. 

Positive

UiPath's deployment within our environment is complex. However, we have online resources available. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

The tool's pricing depends on its use. It is expensive. 

Our business objective was to improve manual processes and increase efficiency. 

Task Capture helps to build documentation. 

UiPath has freed up our resources' time. 

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use the solution for automation. I have implemented the solution in many ways. Some clients need to send us files via email or through Excel. We are reading and creating the file into some internal systems. 

Some other clients need the solution to read invoices from different vendors. We get them from Outlook email and fetch data. 

We are working for finance organizations. For example, the Canadian government is creating rules to discharge loan applications within one month or suffer a fine. We are helping financial companies discharge files on a daily basis to help them maintain compliance and reduce fines. 

Many features are quite useful for us.

The document understanding is something we use a lot. It's very good and easy to use. It was a unique solution at the time. More are providing it now. However, having document understanding at the time was implemented for a US-based client who really liked it. 

It's useful for building automation. It's good for the client side. 

The Studio is very useful for automation and development purposes.

It saves manual labor. Those that don't use it have to hire ten to 15 people to do the same job.

We are able to implement end-to-end automation. To start, we'll meet with the operations team and they'll describe their problems. For example, what they do on a daily basis and how many people they need. Then, we create a requirement document to find ways to move forward and streamline. 

We work for a financial client. They have the top three or four Canadian banks attached to them. They are all providing files. There's money involved in every transaction on a daily basis. If there's any mistake it can cost a lot for the companies. By automating the processes, and removing human error, we are saving a lot of money for these companies. 

We use the user community and forums. They are all very helpful. Every time we have a question, we find a solution to them. We can also find answers on YouTube. It helps us find solutions easily. 

The product has helped us minimize the on-prem footprint. We're using the on-prem orchestrator and it's been helpful. 

I haven't used the UiPath Academy courses, however, we direct new users to it. It's very easy to use and helps new people get up to speed and understand quickly.

It helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation. We're working to automate more on a daily basis. It's continuously upgrading and developing. 

When it comes to document understanding, it's helped reduce human error. It's given us more power to check things, like inappropriate invoices are set aside and they give the user the chance to change the mistake where it makes sense.

It helps free up employee time.  

These days, document understanding costs can be very high, so we've implemented it only for two or three customers. It can be very costly for clients, even though the functionality is very good.

They are continuously improving their product. I have no specific complaints as to its functionality. 

It would be ideal if UiPath had more cloud functionality, similar to Power Automate. 

I've used the solution since 2019.

The solution is usually stable. Sometimes the activity doesn't work as expected. 

I'd rate the stability seven out of ten. 

We have four developer licenses and five developer-attended bots plus five unattended bots. The machines are Azure and on-cloud.

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support is very helpful. I've never had an issue with them.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Power Automate, which allows you to run processes over the cloud. You don't need to run anything through the portal. You need to connect the bot to your machine to run any process in UiPath.

Another difference is the licensing costs. Power Automate offers very low pricing. 

I don't work with any other RPA tools. 

I was not involved in the initial setup. 

There is some configuration required when upgrading. We don't have much maintenance and usually engage the UiPath support team when we need to do configurations. 

The UiPath support team assisted our admin team with the setup.

I don't have specific details in regard to ROI. 

The pricing is quite expensive compared to Power Automate.

Clients are charged on a yearly basis. I'm not sure of the exact amount. 

I am a systems integrator.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

I'd recommend the UiPath Academy to new users and I'd recommend the product to other users looking to automate. 

I've been making some accelerators using it. Each Customer Relationship Management page in the telecom industry has a similar kind of structure, so things do not change a lot. I'm creating an accelerator that can log into a CRM and quickly perform specific tasks as per requirements. For example, the robot will log on to a CRM page, will add updated user information, and check the details of user requests. Another case could be creating specified user service requests and monitoring their status for service efficiency. 

We're automating a bunch of processes in the telecommunication industry. We’re implementing RPA solutions in the biggest telecommunications company in my country. Our main focus was to increase the return on investment. What we tried to do was reduce the time, reduce the manual labor costs and errors, and increase efficiency.

The big picture is to work towards reducing labor costs and creating solutions that are required to enhance your efficiency. This also streamlines process workflows when handling robot exceptions.

The drag-and-drop features and the activities that are pre-made are useful. It's a big plus for UiPath. Whenever I use it, I can do all kinds of work with it and it's really easy. For example, if you have to store data in a dictionary or make a list, there are all kinds of ways to do it. You can do almost anything using UiPath.

The community is very good. I get 90% of my questions answered there.

There’s a good level of maturity in the UiPath framework. Once you get hands-on experience with it and once you are a little bit familiar with it, it becomes really interesting to make automation.

Another thing to add would be queues. It gives you the power to assign multiple bots to any item in the queue and you can monitor the activities and status in the queue.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. Once you have hands-on experience with it, you don't even have to think about the steps. There are hundreds of activities to help you to carry out any solution. It enables you to perform endpoint processes really efficiently.

When you compare the solution to other automation companies, like Automation Anywhere or Microsoft Power Automate, UiPath has the biggest community, and that really helps you a lot. Whatever questions we have will get answered due to the extremely helpful and active community. You get answers pretty quickly as well. Most questions I have are already addressed there. It adds a lot of value to UiPath and plays a major role in our success.

I have done a few UiPath Academy courses. I have not gotten certifications, however, UiPath has advanced certifications and material on the website that lays out those certifications. They have a lot of tutorials to let you get deep into the product.

It's helped speed up our digital transformation. Our main focus has been on automation and increasing efficiencies while reducing errors and costs. Automation helps significantly reduce human error. 

The ease of building automation using UiPath is appreciable. In the beginning, it was a bit difficult as you have to know about C# and VB Script. I come from a Python background. If you are making a list, for example, in Python, it’s very simple. There isn’t that much complexity. If you're doing list manipulation and dictionary manipulation, you have all kinds of data structures. However, when it comes to UiPath, it is not as simple since you have to be very certain about what you're writing.

There are some things missing in UiPath. There used to be an activity where you could just add an item. This activity is now gone. Some of the things in UiPath are changing. This is a bit difficult due to the fact that, if a beginner is trying to add something to a dictionary, they'll have to look through the community's communications and then they might figure out that the old ways are gone. But that is not always the case, there have been better and newly modified activities like ones that help choose selectors for UI Automation.

UiPath is not that fast. They do have an option to increase the speed of processes. You can increase their speed in the settings. However, whenever you do that, the chances of it curbing the flow at some point is higher. 

I've been using it for the last three months. I jumped into this field of automation about six months ago. I have explored Power Automate, Robocorp, and Automation Anywhere during this time. UiPath, however, has been a good experience so far.

The stability is okay and chances of bottlenecking are not much. Occasionally there are some errors and the robots do crash but overall that is not an issue. 

It's a mature product; it can scale well. It's pretty sophisticated so you can get a lot of scalability in the automation process. 

I have not contacted technical support. I'm a beginner, and usually, I turn to the UiPath community forums. Many problems are answered right in the community itself. 

I was using Autosphere before UiPath. I've also used Automation Anywhere and Robocorp. UiPath is for developers and business users. UiPath is far superior to Automation Anywhere, however, when it comes to speed, I feel that Autosphere and Robocorp are faster than UiPath.

I was not involved in the initial deployment. 

They do give a bit of support with processes. However, after a few months, the solution does require some maintenance. We also supply support and our clients hardly need it anymore. 

The cost used to be fine, however, Microsoft has reduced its costs significantly and that's going to be a challenge for UiPath. In comparison to other automation products, UiPath is reasonable. 

I'm an end-user and an administrator. 

I'm not using the AI functionality apart from OCR-related solutions. However, there is a huge market for it. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. This solution offers a lot. It's a good product to try. 

I have automated finance use cases, as well as banking, NOC, and call-center use cases. I have also done email and Excel automations.

It has definitely reduced the cost of the process I have automated. It has reduced the number of employees required for some processes and improved process efficiency. It has improved accuracy and error rates. All of these factors reduce the cost of the processes.

Because there is no human involvement and there is a fixed flow that bots follow, it has minimized the human errors that occurred before.

The Excel automation in UiPath is very easy to use. Even for complex scenarios, we can easily automate the process. And that is true for email automation as well.

Building automations in UiPath is done through simple activities. We just drag and drop into a workflow, build the flow, and execute it. It's that simple.

We use UiPath Academy courses as well, and they give us an idea of how we can use it professionally. They have given us a complete idea of how to use the solution.

When it comes to web automation, a change order should be able to be handled more easily.

I have been using UiPath for almost three years.

Compared to other tools, UiPath is very stable, as well as easy to install, manage, and upgrade.

It is more scalable than Automation Anywhere.

I have not contacted their technical support.

UiPath has more costly licenses than Automation Anywhere and, of course, Power Automate.

There are multiple differences between UiPath and Automation Anywhere. Automation Anywhere has a good handle on desktop automation as well as its IQ Bots for document understanding.

I would rate UiPath at seven out of 10 overall.

We primarily use the solution for automation.

UiPath has been quite useful for the organization. It's helped reduce workloads.

The processing time is the best aspect of the solution. There are also fewer coding requirements. It takes less time to develop and implement projects using UiPath for this reason. 

It's easy to build automation. The organization has a variety of projects and we can complete the projects faster using automation using UiPath.

The product enables us to implement end-to-end automation.

We use the UiPath user community. If you have any doubts about what you are doing, you can turn to the community and they'll answer your questions - which is very helpful. 

The Academy courses are very useful. If you want to do any certifications, it's very simple.

We use the AI functionality. It helps automate processes that are more involved. However, it's something the team works on; I don't know much about it. 

The solution helps us reduce human error as we can run many projects without much human involvement. Once we reduce human interactions, we can reduce human error quite significantly.

It's also helped us free up employee time thanks to the automation. It's freed up maybe 30% to 40% of our time since we started implementing automation.

We've tried to use test automation, however, I'm not sure how well it works.

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We took about three or four months to deploy the solution. The process itself is moderate. We were able to manage the process ourselves. While it's rather easy, it does take some time.

The licensing cost is quite high. It could be reduced. 

I'm an end-user of UiPath. I'm an RPA developer. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. There should still be more opportunities to make the solution less expensive.