UiPath Platform Reviews

We use the solution for task automation. 

The automation for building tasks is good. It reduces the manpower needed. It helps us automate large projects. 

It's easy to create automation with the solution. Once we understand the process, we can easily create an automation. 

We use end-to-end automation. It helps us remove the need for manual labor. 

We are satisfied with the user community UiPath offers as well. 

The solution has helped simplify projects and our requirements. 

We've used the Academy courses. Anyone can access it. It's great that anyone can take advantage of it. You don't need to be technical. 

The solution has reduced the cost of digital transformation.

It's helped reduce human error by 100%.

The solution has freed up employee time.

UiPath should improve the document understanding a bit. 

I have been using the solution since 2021.

The solution is stable. 

We have 50+ users using the solution. 

It's scalable. 

Technical support is good. 

Positive

I did not use a different solution. 

The deployment was not complex. It's easy. We had to test it a bit manually. Once we were sure we had the right requirements in place, we implemented it. 

It only takes ten minutes to deploy the solution. 

When you change the version of the solution, there is some maintenance required. 

We've used the enterprise version of the solution. 

We're developers. We have customers that use UiPath. 

We can implement the AI functionality, however, we haven't used it yet.

I'd rate the product nine out of ten. 

We use it mostly for the banking and insurance domains. We are a service-based company and the tools we use depend on our clients' requirements.

UiPath provides scalability, quality, and a high level of accuracy. It has definitely reduced human error.

It also helps minimize the on-premises footprint, which is important for our clients' environments.

The most valuable features include

• multi-bot architecture
• UiPath Studio
• Test Manager.

It is easy to build automations with this solution as well. We are able to implement end-to-end automation.

There are also build connectors for Salesforce and SAP. Before the connectors, we could only automate the GUI. Now, it is very easy to integrate on the back end as well.

The UiPath Academy courses are also helpful. When a feature or release comes out, they demonstrate them in the Academy.

And if there are any issues, the UiPath community forum helps us to check whether others are also facing these issues. There are a lot of benefits from that.

For some of the cognitive features we have to learn the integration side. Other than that, everything is fine.

I have been using UiPath for nearly three years.

The LTS version is very stable.

It is also definitely scalable. I would recommend it for any size of company, from small to large. For example, if a small company only needs UiPath Studio, they can have it. They don't need UiPath Orchestrator. They can run things with Studio only. There are a lot of options with UiPath.

Their support is good to have, especially for priority issues. 

One thing that would be helpful is if the support team could quickly help us when we raise a ticket. It takes them at least one or two hours to get back to us. With Automation Anywhere, if there is a Severity 1 issue, their support responds within 15 minutes.

Positive

Setting it up is very easy.

The amount of time it takes depends on the client's security requirements. Some teams have restrictions and documentation on how things should be done. But once everything has been verified, deployment will take one to two hours.

Once it's deployed, it's the validation checks that take some time but it depends upon the project: the supporting files and checking that all the integrations are correctly mapped.

In terms of project deployment, we generally have three people involved. One of them will completely handle monitoring and supporting, as well as the Control Room and any logs or administrative tasks. The other two handle change requests.

As for maintenance, our setup is on-premises and we have an internal team that takes care of situations when the server is down. They will restart it and do patch updates, which they will inform us about.

We are using the Enterprise version. We are exploring using it in the cloud, but some of our banking clients do not accept the cloud because of security issues so we go for on-prem only in those cases.

We are not fully using UiPath's AI functionality but we are doing some PoCs, based on our clients' requirements, to check the feasibility. For that, we are using the Community Edition. As for UiPath speeding up digital transformation, I'm not sure. It depends on the process involved.

Overall, I don't see a need for any additional features. I don't have any difficulty using UiPath.

I did a proof of concept for a music industry client. It went well, and the client adopted UiPath. 

UiPath improved lots of features, like sequencing, recording, etc.

I had some issues with the ERP Automation features, and the setup is complex. 

UiPath is stable. 

UiPath projects are highly scalable. There are lots of customization options and ways to easily scale your existing bots. 

I haven't contacted UiPath support because the solution is stable and doesn't require support in most cases. The UiPath community is strong, and you can find answers from multiple places online. 

As a project consultant, I analyze the client's applications and set up everything for them. The initial setup is time-consuming. UiPath involves a longer setup process than other RPA tools.

I rate UiPath a five out of ten for affordability. UiPath costs a bit more than other tools like Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. 

I rate UiPath a seven out of ten. UiPath offers many customization options. I would recommend it to clients who want to do high-quality processes and complex use cases. You also must consider your budget because the license cost is a little higher than average. 

We use it mostly for our sales and for our clients, with relatively simple, stand-alone robotic solutions. Some are attended and some are unattended. We use it for reporting in our finance and HR departments. 

We have automated processes for our clients that, before, took somebody three days to do, and now they're done in minutes. That says everything. It's extremely useful for saving time and avoiding mistakes. Those are the two main efficiency factors that we have seen with our clients. Repetitive projects, where someone has to copy a lot of data from one place to another and then work with the data, are very prone to mistakes. We can completely eliminate mistakes and save people a lot of time so that they can do more interesting tasks. We have developed programs that reduce human error by 100 percent. There are no errors, once they are automated.

And it absolutely accelerates the process of digital transformation. There is no doubt that it is getting faster and faster. We are thinking about combining RPA solutions from UiPath with ChatGPT or whatever else comes along, to see if we can make them work together. This will be the future.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation. We have projects where it automates the entire process from one end to the other. Very often we have "human-in-the-loop" within them, because some decisions have to be made, but they are almost end-to-end solutions.

End-to-end automation is extremely important. Usually, when we start with a new client, we start with a smaller process as a type of proof of concept, so that they can see what is possible. Then, we extend it up and down until we have an end-to-end solution. We have seen that it's better to develop a process step-by-step, and not try to do everything at once. But in the end, we have an end-to-end solution.

The UiPath community is used by our developers. They ask questions and receive responses. They are definitely active there.

We have had issues with Ingram Micro. It happened that we ordered licenses and we received something else. It takes a relatively long time, two and sometimes even three weeks, after the order until we receive licenses, and clients are sometimes a little bit impatient. This is something that should be accelerated.

I have been using UiPath for almost four years.

UiPath is a stable solution. One of the reasons we left the Foxtrot solution was that it was unstable. If we had the same process running 10 times, we could get three different results. But with UiPath, we have never had any issues regarding stability.

It's scalable.

We have discussions sometimes with people from UiPath about solutions and things that we have done already. That is working quite well. The support is very good.

We participate quite frequently in UiPath webinars, especially when they are presenting new versions or components or pricing models for the software, so that we keep everybody up to date on the latest developments. They develop things very quickly. It's difficult to keep up with the speed at which they are developing new solutions.

Positive

It is very straightforward to implement. The setting up of a license is something that is done within an hour. It's the development that takes more time. Most of our clients are large, multinational companies.

UiPath itself does not require any maintenance, but solution maintenance is required if something changes for one of our clients.

Everybody is afraid of the licensing fees in the beginning, and because we are in Romania where salaries are still significantly lower than in Western Europe, that means that licensing fees have a bigger impact on costs for the company. But we are also working more and more for companies outside of Romania, where that is less of an issue.

When we come up with an offer in which the licensing fees are getting a little bigger, clients are more reluctant. That is another reason that we prefer to start with something a bit smaller until they get acquainted with the solution and see the advantages.

We looked at other solutions. We started with something called Foxtrot RPA, which didn't work well at all. We also compared UiPath with Automation Anywhere. But UiPath offers a better variety of possibilities, it's more flexible, and it's very easy to program if you are a developer and know other programming languages. UiPath offers StudioX for people who do not have any experience with development, but it's still a little too complicated.

We are not using a lot of the abilities that UiPath offers. We have made some attempts to use Document Understanding and we would very much like to do project mining, but we haven't had a client that is interested in that yet.

I would recommend that you start by implementing a small, standalone process, something that is not part of a big process. Automate that small process first to get used to how it works and see what can be done with RPA in general. And only then start with more complex processes. The latter take more time to develop, and clients don't like to wait.

I use UiPath for PDF automation. About 10 to 15 employees use this tool in our organization.

UiPath saves us time and increases productivity for our organization. The solution is highly accurate and reduces human error. It freed our employees to spend time on other tasks, saving us time and money. UiPath reduced the time employees spend on these tasks by about 40-50 percent. It cut the cost by approximately 30-40 percent.

UiPath is highly user-friendly. Anyone can build automations without any prior knowledge.

Sometimes, UiPath becomes a little laggy when we move from one page to another. 

I have been using UiPath for the last six months.

There is some lag. Otherwise, UiPath works well for us. 

UiPath is highly scalable. 

I rate UiPath support a nine. They respond quickly.

Positive

We've seen a 60-70 percent ROI from UiPath.

The price of UiPath is reasonable.

I rate UiPath a nine out of ten. It automates manual tasks with accurate results. UiPath has been great for us.

I'm using UiPath for personal use. I'm trying to create an application in which all the work can be automated, such as financial, HR, and educational-related work so that we can have easy access to the details of candidates.

I'm using it for a small edge case and UiPath is able to solve it in a great way.

I'm very happy with the automation because it gives me more freedom to make things work on my projects.

With UiPath I have been able to increase productivity because the manual work has been reduced and everything is now automated with NLT and ML techniques. We aren't required to go into the specific aspects of every document. We get systemized documents that we can go through and get the details. The NLT is a major part of it for me because it can sense the text and make it more useful for me. It converts it in a way that I don't have to go through all the details.

It has reduced errors in a drastic way and that is something I really appreciate in UiPath. I would estimate the reduction at nearly 25 percent. Before, we were doing this work manually and it took a lot of hours. Now it has been reduced by 10 times and maybe more than that.

I like the automation tool in UiPath that helps in creating the bots. It helps me a lot in getting details from documents. Also, the ML/NLT models are good because they help with data recognition.

Creating automation is pretty simple. Everything is clearly mentioned. And the UiPath team has helped a lot with the learning curve. The user community is very helpful in solving issues. You can find different channels and YouTube videos for details. In terms of community, UiPath is doing great.

Many of the features were very complex in the beginning but with some experience, it has become a great tool for me.

I have been using UiPath for about six months.

It's stable.

We haven't required technical support because the community is very strong and every problem and solution is already there. And the UiPath solution team is also very strong.

Positive

We did not have a previous solution.

We took our time with the deployment. It was a planned activity and it was very straightforward. We didn't face any issues. We spent time reading the documentation and going through the videos about how to deploy things. The entire activity took some days, but the deployment, specifically, took around three or four hours. There were two of us involved.

There is a little maintenance. Sometimes we have to manage the storage and other things, but it's nothing major.

The pricing is fine and the features are good. Still, the pricing could be a little lower. With tools like AI/ML, if the pricing can be reduced, everyone will be able to adopt it.

I would recommend UiPath. For us, it solved our use cases, and we are really happy with it.

We have two primary use cases. We use UiPath to scrape data from multiple websites and platforms, mainly for competitive intelligence and internal use. The other use case is basic automation, that is, moving files from one system to another when there is no direct integration. Through UiPath and leveraging RPAs, we pull data from one system, for example, an S3 bucket or Google Drive, and put it into our database.

The use of UiPath has resulted in time savings for our organization. It has probably saved us 40 development hours a month.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. If you compare it to building these scripts using Python or any other programming languages directly, then it is incomparable. If you write a .NET or a Python code, it will take a lot of time development-wise. The ease of building automations is very high compared to that with programming languages.

End-to-end automation is important to us in terms of deployment and development. Development is definitely easy, but the orchestration of those flows and deployment can be a hassle to maintain and manage. With UiPath, we are able to monitor the workloads and orchestrate the different workloads within the app ecosystem itself.

The UiPath community has grown and is active. It is definitely helpful to be a part of it because others can assist us.

UiPath Academy courses helped reduce the learning curve.

You can speed up digital transformation and reduce the cost of digital transformation using UiPath. It provides a good orchestrator, and the fully managed option can help reduce the burden on IT staff.

We have been able to reduce human error by using UiPath. Suppose we need to move files from one place to another. If we move it through a system and predefined rules, the system will not make a mistake. It will always pick up the particular file and concatenate it where it is supposed to. However, a human can, by mistake, concatenate one file to another.

For small use cases, it would be great to have independent runner licenses with costs that are comparable to those of Power Automate. Then, UiPath would be a better alternative.

The AI functionality was not that effective in complex scenarios when I used it some time ago.

I would like to see a universal recorder feature added so that we can record Excel macros. You could then click a button to record the screen, and then all the actions across applications would be recorded. This functionality is available already in Automation Anywhere, but the last time I checked, it was not available in UiPath.

I've used it for over a year.

UiPath is a stable solution.

It is a scalable tool.

I found the initial setup to be straightforward, and it took less than a week. You don't need dedicated staff to maintain the solution.

We implemented it ourselves. We had a team of three who worked on the deployment.

We haven't seen much ROI; it has been average. As a result, we are moving to Power Automate.

The pricing is competitive, and for large-scale use cases, UiPath may make better sense cost-wise. However, it is not very viable for small-scale use cases. Power Automate is much cheaper and has similar functionalities.

UiPath offers two options. If you choose the on-premises option, then you would have to manage it yourself, but if you go for the fully managed one, then there won't be any overhead cost.

We are gradually moving to Power Automate and Power Apps because we are already on the Microsoft stack, and it helps us reduce the footprint. If the cost of UiPath were comparable to that of Power Automate, then UiPath would have been the better alternative.

In my previous company, we used Power Automate, Automation Anywhere, and UiPath. The only good aspect of Power Automate is that it has very minimal cost implications. IQ Bot from Automation Anywhere is slightly better than UiPath's AI capability. Also, the ease of building automations with UiPath is comparable to that of Automation Anywhere and Power Automate.

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

We started by looking for something easy to change our process, and we liked a lot of systems that had low code. We started to submit and sell orders and transform reports into dashboards with the robot.

While we have used it for a short time, we see a lot of future potential for us. We have other departments, for example, finance, HR, and engineering. We can use this solution to improve our workflows, our reports, and dashboards across departments.

We are looking for ways to save time and free up people. It is important. We want to remove the mechanical jobs so that people use the time they gain to focus on other strategies and figure out how to add value to the business.

They make it easy to change the process inside the routine. We can find out how to remove gaps and change the process. There isn't just one way; we have a lot of exceptions in our business, and with the robot, we can change to meet our requirements. There isn't just one way to do things.

The user community is helpful. We know a lot of people inside of this process and a lot of good people with good tools that can help.

We are just starting with the Academy courses. We're in the process of learning and have a PMO that is using the Academy. It helps us to better understand use cases and other situations. 

We'd like the solution to allow us to remove all developers. In a situation where you need a developer, we'd like it to get to the point where we don't need them. It needs to be easier to use with more low code. Low code is the future.

I've been using the solution for five months.

We find the solution to be stable. It's not just building the robot - it's being able to sustain it. So far, we trust its capabilities and have not questioned its stability.

I've witnessed some proof that the solution can scale. 

We did not need any technical support. We haven't used support yet.

We used Pipefy in the past. It's a BPM that has automation processes inside it. That said, it's so different as it's just for Pipefy integration to another system. It's not a kind of robot, so there's no automation process. We still use it. We work with them and UiPath. Right now, we use the workflow, and, if the workflow doesn't work or is bad at automation, we use UiPath.

We just recently set up the solution and are still putting in the work.

We just started to use the solution as part of a trial. It's still too new to measure an ROI.

The solution is expensive. It's almost the same as other options. However, it is a bit cheaper since we don't need a developer. We can just buy the license and use the product. 

We looked into Automation Anywhere, IBM, and another startup. Once we started to use UiPath and found out how easy it was to build our first robot, we stopped looking into other options. 

We like to fix, build and change by ourselves. The other options required us to need someone from the outside and to pay for a consultant or contracted person to assist us. With UiPath, we have ultimate control, and everything is in our hands. 

At this time, we do not yet use UiPath to automate processes that involve a good cause, such as social responsibility.

Right now, we use UiPath on a virtual machine, yet we're hoping we'll be able to go more mobile in the future. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten since we've only used it for such a short amount of time.