UiPath Platform Reviews

We have tried more of the RPA part. We haven't used much of the cognitive part.

We use it for our client purposes. We don't use it much for internal use.

It has helped to automate many processes. One of the places where we have tried it is the Citizen Development Engagement Program. That's where some of the people who were tech-savvy were able to use it properly.

It enables implementing end-to-end automation to an extent. Having a single tool for everything is helpful.

It reduces human error. A person can focus on his or her core activities rather than doing repetitive tasks.

It has freed up employee time. The time saved could be 70% to 80% depending on the use case of an employee.

The product is good. It's highly scalable, and it's stable. Over the last one and a half years, based on whatever we have developed, we've found it to be pretty stable as compared to the other platforms, such as Automation Anywhere.

We have used UiPath Academy courses. In UiPath Academy, there are courses and role-based training programs. They are good and effective. They give you some exercises to perform, and the community edition is also available, which is good.

The cognitive capabilities of UiPath are pretty time-consuming. If that can be improved, it would help a lot.

I'm not using it directly. Our team has been using it for the last seven or eight years. I have some experience with it but not to a very detailed level. 

It's stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of stability.

It's scalable. I would rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

Their support was good, but at the same time, for certain areas where we had issues, we had to directly call them up and try to get support from their internal COE teams. I would rate their support a nine out of ten.

We weren't using any other solution previously.

I wasn't involved in its initial setup.

They would've not directly saved costs, but they certainly would've gotten some value in terms of time efficiency or productivity, which would've indirectly helped them to save costs. The savings also depend on the FTEs freed because of automation.

I didn't evaluate any other solution, but people in my company might have evaluated other options.

Understand the product first, go through their internal training, and then decide whether you like it and how you want to use it.

It can speed up digital transformation or reduce the cost of digital transformation, depending on how you use it and where you use it. This digital transformation doesn't require complex application upgrades, but support upgrades are required.

I've explored UiPath's community, but in a couple of instances, I didn't get any proper responses or proper answers. We had to directly get in touch with the UiPath team for insights and information about the queries we had.

Overall, I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

I work in development, creating robots, and I use UiPath for automation.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premise footprint and reduced human error. It has also sped up digital transformation and reduced its cost without requiring any expensive or complex application upgrades.

UiPath's best feature is that it's low code. UiPath also has the best community I can think of in the IT sector.

UiPath would be improved by integrating AI.

I've been working with UiPath for four years.

UiPath is very stable.

UiPath is very easy to scale.

UiPath makes it easy to build automations, monitor the activity of the robots, and let the business side interact with the robots. It also has a lot of applications, starting from test capture and process mining to reporting the activity of the robots. UiPath is a simple solution if you're looking to save time and money, but in the long term, I would suggest customizing the main applications you're using. I would rate UiPath nine out of ten.

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 use it for unattended automation. Most of it is centered around finance for various reporting purposes. We also use this solution to move data between systems.

The biggest improvement is giving people time back in their day. We're still not where we'd like to be with our automation journey, so we don't have the time savings that we would like at the moment. However, we are continuing on that journey and helping to free up users and allowing them to work on things they want to work on.

The Excel integration is definitely good. We use that a lot because our finance department uses Excel. Overall, I really like Studio and unattended automation. Automation Cloud is very good as well. The platform as a whole has been good for us.

I like the UiPath user community, and the forums are really good. Most of the time, I can find answers there to any issues I'm having. The UiPath forums are very active, and I like seeing the employees in there as well.

We onboard any new developers that we have for RPA using UiPath Academy. It reduces the amount of training time in which the RPA team is involved because the Academy courses can take care of a lot of the fundamentals on UiPath.

Integration is an area for improvement. I still encounter issues with it, like getting errors when I try to use a connection.

We've been using it since 2019.

I have no complaints regarding the stability of UiPath. We have never had any issues with regressions or weird bugs.

We're still in the early stage of our journey with UiPath. Right now, we have six unattended robots and about 25 processes running on those, which is not at a scale where we might see issues. However, I have no complaints with regard to scalability so far.  Also, achieving the scalability we may need seems pretty straightforward.

UiPath's technical support is on par with that of other companies. We seem to spend a lot of time sending logs back and forth, and because of that, I would give technical support a rating of seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was not too bad. We started in the finance units since they were the ones pushing for RPA, and they've been our biggest internal customers so far.

We worked with our reseller who guided us through the entire setup. They did a few automations for us until we had that practice in-house.

In terms of ROI, we are saving more than what the platform costs us. We are at about 1.5 million in savings due to recent automation. It was a little less than that before. These are soft savings and don't show up on balance sheets. We're trying to work toward automation that actually do lead to hard savings. We've saved about 43,000 hours in a year so far.

The licensing makes sense, but it does lead to a few adoption issues when a lot of the licenses are per user. Convincing some of our business units to pay for user licenses for either Action Center or attended robots can be a roadblock.

We looked at Blue Prism. The biggest reason for going with UiPath is that we are a heavy .NET shop. Therefore, the fact that UiPath is based on .NET and that we can write our own custom activities in C# bar and Visual Basic were big factors for us. It meant that we would be able to adopt UiPath faster and that it would fit with our current Microsoft stack as well. We also liked where the UiPath platform as a whole was going, becoming not just RPA development but integrations as well. In comparison, Blue Prism seemed to have stuck with RPA and not expanded much beyond that.

Take a look at UiPath's platform as a whole and what it can do aside from just RPA automation. I would also advise you not to discount the tech stack. Overall, I like the platform, and I think it's headed in the right direction. Because of that, I would give it a rating of nine on a scale from one to ten.

The solution helps our organization with filing sales and use tax returns. We mainly copy and paste data from Excel and process it in the solution. 

We do not use AI yet, but want to start looking into it. 

The solution has helped by decreasing the manual work required to file certain tax returns. A manual return takes about an hour but bots can complete the work in twenty minutes. This time savings has been a big help for our organization. 

The Studio is valuable because it helps us to build bots.

The Insights have been super valuable because they help us determine the benefits of our bots.

The Insights could be improved to be more user friendly and less reliant on code for building specific dashboards.

The Orchestrator could be improved to make it easier to manage folders where bots are stored.  

I have been using the solution since July of 2021. 

The solution is stable and we have no problems running bots. 

The solution is scalable and it is pretty easy to see how processes can be applied across multiple teams. 

The Community is very cool and it has been interesting to see all the various companies involved with the solution. There are many good ideas and it is valuable to hear from speakers. 

The Academy offers courses that are very helpful and assist in getting up and running. Instead of having to figure everything out, classes are available for learning Studio, StudioX, and Insights a bit quicker.  

Technical support has been fine but nothing special. I have only opened a few cases so far and support resolved those problems. 

Neutral

We did not previously use another solution. 

The setup and deployment was pretty straightforward. 

Many things come with the cloud platform so they can be a bit complex until you learn about them. I feel like we are learning new things on the platform every day. Once we learn a product, it is relatively straightforward. 

We implemented the solution in-house. We wanted to cover the lowest hanging fruit that would give us the most immediate benefit. 

With initial deployment completed, we have moved to taking our time to learn Studio and expand to more complex automations. We work with Tquila Automation who has been very helpful with development and learning. 

We have realized ROI because we have saved over 1,200 hours that would have been required for manual filings. This has been a big help because staff can instead focus on other things. 

The solution is definitely expensive but is a powerful technology that we do not expect for free. It is important to justify the business cost by explaining the ROI to stakeholders. 

We evaluated several options before choosing the solution, including Blue Prism. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The use of this solution is spread out across our organization. On the IT side, we use it for synoptic notes like admission process, reviewing invoices and giving usage access.

The insights that this solution provides have been most valuable. We use these insights to report to higher management on the performance of our processes. 

UiPath also helps us reduce manual work although we do not yet use UiPath's AI functionality. We have learned a lot from the UiPath community and gained knowledge about future products and enhancements. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them.

I have been using this solution for six years. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them. We then need to go through the process again and reopen a ticket with the same information.

Neutral

I have a little bit of experience using Automation Anywhere, but I prefer UiPath. The coding with Automation Anywhere was not developer friendly. 

Our whole team was new to this solution so there was a learning curve involved for all of us which made the setup difficult at times. At this stage, UiPath was one or two years old with limited documentation. The deployment did not take long.

We deployed this solution with the help of a partner called Ernst & Young.

We have experienced a return on investment using the solution as it has led to three million in savings since we started using it. 

We would prefer it if the licences were packaged together. When it comes to developer licences, we need to pay to transfer licences when a developer leaves and this also creates additional work for our IT team. 

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend UiPath to others because it is a good tool and has a lot of potential to expand. 

UiPath offers direct integrations with multiple platforms that we need, like Google Drive, Slack, Visio, etc. For Slack, UiPath automates the process when we upload a new file, document, or a new version of it. It automatically sends an email or any other sources that we automate through it. That is our main use case.

We upload a lot of content for our website or internal work on Google Drive. When a team member uploads content, we do not get a notification from Google Drive that a document has been uploaded by someone unless they share it. With UiPath, we have automated it so if someone uploads a document in a Google Drive folder, we get an email on a certain email address that a document has been uploaded. Or, when there is a version change, we also get an email. So, we have automated these kinds of processes using UiPath.

It is mainly the automation process for internal tasks. All our direct integrations are for internal work, mainly email triggers that we built using UiPath. These are very useful.

The direct integrations are most valuable. You can directly link your account to multiple platforms, such as Google Drive and Visio, without using an API.

We have used the Orchestrator's trigger creation workflow to create multiple triggers for our automation processes.

It could be improved with tutorials or documentation-wise. Some of the features of the artificial intelligence or Orchestrator have been a little confusing for me. So, I would like an easy YouTube video tutorial or quick demo call. It would be much better for every user if they could introduce that.

Around six to seven months ago, I started using UiPath.

UiPath has always been up so stability is not a problem.

It is really scalable, even for large businesses. We are pretty small, but as you grow, UiPath has great options for scaling up.

We currently have two people using it: the co-founder and me.

I haven't needed to contact their support yet.

We previously used basic process automation platforms.

We switched to UiPath because it offered better features that we needed. For example, its direct integrations are pretty useful. It has every integration that we directly need so we don't need to use APIs or code anything. It is simple and direct. That is the main reason that we use UiPath.

It was straightforward from the process of registering your account to creating an organization, then doing the integrations. The process was really easy and did not take too much time the first time. I think it took us an hour to deploy.

We are on the Community plan, so it has great return on investment.

UiPath has saved our staff time. Using the automation of UiPath, it triggers an email or notification for a process that we have created. This keeps us informed at all times. However, if we don't use it, content may get missed and we would lose a lot of opportunities.

The pricing is good. They offer a Community edition that we currently use, which is free. Their paid pricing is pretty affordable for businesses as well.

I went to review websites and saw that UiPath is great.

In case you are not going to drag and drop APIs, they should definitely go and have a look at direct integration. 

I would rate the solution as nine out of 10.

I'm a consultant. Right now, I work on supply chain coordination. I have also used UiPath for finances, for building reports for engineering, and for human resources departments.

The solution is on-premises, but we are migrating to the cloud.

The solution helps a lot when we are dealing with big companies where governance is a must. We can have multiple centers of excellence at different places in the company. UiPath is easy to deploy and easy to manage for such companies as we can centralize a lot of things in one place.

For example, with Orchestrator not only can we monitor all the bots and processes, but it helps in the development phase as well. If we want to have custom libraries that solve specific problems for the company, we can create those custom libraries and share them throughout the organization. This helps a lot when it comes to governance, compared to other automation solutions.

I created a project based on attended automation and it was successful in helping the user. It was a bot to create engineering reports and the user was able to implement it on a daily basis. I have a positive view of attended automations. Having said that, unattended bots are preferable because we want most of the processes to be automated, end-to-end, and not require the user to start them. We use attended robots only when there is no other solution. So attended bots are not as relevant as unattended robots, in my experience.

In addition, because the user did not need to create that report anymore, he could focus on more analytical thinking. That is something that I always say when starting an RPA project. Users become freer to do analytical thinking and not robotic thinking where they just click here and there and move some Excel files. I would estimate it saved them five to eight hours a week.

In a lot of the projects I have worked on, reducing human error was one of the priorities for the automation. When working with human resources, for example, reports could go wrong if the user did not create them properly. This could cause the company to have to pay fees. Automating those reports reduced the risk to zero and helped with compliance.

UiPath also reduces the overall costs of automation operations. Although it's more expensive as a solution when compared to other vendors, because it's a very consistent application and there is really good support from the UiPath team, it is the fastest when it comes to developing and deploying automation. It is surely the most reliable in the long term. That's where UiPath is at the top.

The best feature, for sure, is the ease of development. It's very easy to create an automation from scratch. Time to production is really fast when everything is already set up and we have a clear view of what needs to be done. UiPath has a more friendly development environment compared to other vendors of RPA.

And the Task Capture feature helps implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis. Task Capture helps us map a business process from start, and it can generate code in UiPath's Studio development platform. If you use it correctly, it definitely helps.

And with Orchestrator, we can keep watch over all the executions and also create easy integrations with BI tools like Power BI and Tableau, if I need some extra analysis on the data that is being processed. Orchestrator provides everything that I need for monitoring.

Although they add a lot of enhancements every month to the solution in general, they could focus more on UiPath Studio. I would like to see them add more features for developers who have a deeper understanding of programming languages. 

They could also make it easier to integrate custom-made functions.

One of the downsides of Automation Cloud, and this is more an issue related to the Community version, is that they always place the newest features on the Community version. I have experienced some issues when implementing automations on that version because things can change from one day to another. Some of these changes can impact automations that were running. But when it comes to the Enterprise version, things are very stable. They will never change things like that from one day to the next.

I've been using UiPath for about three years.

It's pretty stable. I have never gotten errors on the connection between the bots, Orchestrator, and Studio. 

The errors I have found are generally related to the network or to a virtual machine with fewer resources than the minimum requirements. 

The overall execution of the automations is pretty fast, even when dealing with high volumes of data from Excel files, compared to VBA or another scripting tool.

I have opened tickets with UiPath and they have helped me a lot in solving the issues. I have never had major issues with support. If I need to open an urgent ticket, I get a response on the same day. They call me to solve the issue together with them, if needed.

It's also really good that UiPath has a strong community. They started the idea of sharing new features and engaging the community. That has definitely helped UiPath to be on the list of the top vendors. There were times when I reached out to the community and they were very fast in helping me solve a question or get through an error. The community, for me, is one of the differences when compared to other RPA vendors.

Positive

I have not worked with other solutions at an enterprise level. I have looked at them just to understand how they work and to see if they could serve my purposes better than UiPath.

The on-premises setup takes some time because we have to implement Orchestrator among other things. Generally, it's very fast. Sometimes there are issues, things like application and environment access, but they're usually more related to the customer that I'm working with. Overall, if everything is good to go, installation and configuration can be done in a day.

I worked with a national company on an on-premises solution and it took four hours to install Orchestrator, and one to two hours more to implement UiPath Studio and the UiPath robot. It was really straightforward with no configuration errors. Using the right versions of Windows Server and the virtual machines, the ones that UiPath recommends, helps everything go smoothly.

When working with a customer that is just starting to use RPA, I usually pick all the recommendations for installation and configuration from the UiPath vendor website. I then add some extra tips on configuring the Windows Server and ask the customer to provide the environments. That gives me access to everything that I need. 

There can always be additional details to deal with, but they are usually errors to do with infrastructure, permissions, or proxy configuration on the customer's side. These are usually things that they did not mention, and then we have to reconfigure things. But if I don't know how to handle them I can usually find a UiPath tutorial where they teach you how. UiPath always provides the knowledge that I need to implement the solution.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation. When dealing with a customer's first RPA implementation, and they are comparing UiPath with other vendors, the downside of UiPath is always the price because it's the most expensive platform. However, it is the fastest and most reliable. The community is great. The support is great. So it definitely speeds up the digital transformation process a lot.

When customers are comparing tools, we focus on the strong points of UiPath. For example, it's the least expensive over the long term because it's very reliable, and we are not going to spend too much time on the development. The development is always faster when compared to other tools.

If customers are only looking at the initial price for implementing RPA, they may go with other vendors. I have seen this happen a couple of times. When this is the case we will usually want to use the least expensive license possible from UiPath. For example, when a company has only one unattended robot, they will try to put multiple processes on the same robot before jumping to buy another robot and expanding the overall architecture.

Some things can be done with open-source tools, but they lack governance when implementing automation on a large scale. When we talk about scaling the solution, a solution like UiPath is the clearest choice.

Free automation tools are not going to be as easy to deploy and scale as UiPath.

When we are developing RPA projects for digital transformation, we want to provide a solution that is reliable and fast. UiPath helps on both of those counts. It enables us to implement automation in a fast, secure, and reliable way.

I have worked on some projects with UiPath Automation Cloud, but mostly using the same tools as usual. I didn't take too much advantage of what the cloud provides, compared to other projects, but it's easier to manage if a company needs to start from scratch. With Automation Cloud you don't have as much to maintain, such as handling an on-premises server. It also definitely helps for keeping things updated.

With everything centralized on Automation Cloud, it's very easy when it comes to a higher level of governance. For example, if I want to manage the licensing between Orchestrators, and create different tenants and manage the access between those tenants, that is all very easy to do. UiPath gives you a very clean interface.

A SaaS solution helps a lot when working on projects for many of our customers because they do not have any RPA infrastructure. They are often starting their first project and a SaaS solution has everything centralized. They can just buy one license for attended or unattended robots and start from there. It's great for the customers because they only need to worry about a virtual machine in their environment. We create a minimum viable product more efficiently because we don't have to worry about the configuration of their own Orchestrator and the like.

Also, when they want to scale, Automation Cloud will be much easier.

I keep myself updated on the news from UiPath and they are starting to implement serverless robots on the cloud. I don't know if this is already available in the Enterprise version, but when it comes out, companies do want to implement it because they won't even need to worry about an on-premises virtual machine. Everything will be in the cloud.

I started my learning about UiPath from the Academy. It's very good and very insightful, and the questions and exercises are everything that you need to learn how to automate using UiPath Studio or any other tool.

The Academy is a must for starting with RPA using UiPath. There are some other courses online in other learning platforms, but UiPath already provides everything that you need to start an RPA career. Not only can you learn the developer's role, but also the role of a business analyst and solution architect. It gives you an understanding of all the steps involved in creating and managing automations.

The certification is also very important. At the time I did the certification, it was free. It's very valuable for someone starting out who wants to get an RPA job.

We implement automation for clients to create savings by cutting the number of FTEs. We've used UiPath for various kinds of automation, including mainframes, browsers, Excel, account payables and receivables, fixed assets, healthcare projects, HR projects, reporting robots, and IT services projects. 

Recently, we did a massive US taxation project that spanned eleven months and covered enterprise and individual taxation extensions. It was a huge project that yielded a lot of savings. 

If I want to leverage a specific UiPath use case, I build small use cases around that particular feature and try to envision a product out of it. I've had several hackathons and general discussion calls because I'm a solution architect. Everybody wants to work on apps, and UiPath is comparable to the blank canvas apps that Microsoft PowerApps provides. 

When we had an automation program that involved 200-plus automations, we created around 100-plus libraries, saving us thousands of hours of development time. UiPath is designed to save time. The object repository was liberating because it enabled us to move from simple to extendable libraries. UiPath's apps increase our business by helping us leverage the UI layer in a way we couldn't in the past.

It gives us the ability to share data between systems in healthcare applications.. However, it's still tricky because so many system controls are in place. That's not a limitation of UiPath per se, but every department has restrictions on passing data to other departments. They have their own due diligence in place, limiting data flow from one system to another. UiPath gives us the fluidity and freedom to do it, but the limitations within each domain often get in the way.

Let's use claims data, for example. The data regulation team won't be too keen on allowing the marketing department to use data from the claims division to generate new business. The data flow from one department to another isn't that fluid. Organizational controls rather than system controls bind it.

We should look at each separately in terms of AI and machine learning. If we want to do data analysis, we have to call an inverse Python script, which is a little difficult. However, we can host our own model, and that's good. The ability to use that opened some doors. 

At the same time, it's helpful to have out-of-the-box features like Document Understanding and an ML passer there. The integration is quite fluid. We can directly call a Document Understanding model and then give it to ML passer and then get the results out. It's smoother for integration. The client has to focus on one particular software or multi-stack that they're comfortable with. UiPath has opened some opportunities in that sense. It made life easier because the capability is sitting inside the platform itself. 

UiPath is a separate solution, but it can talk to other services and doesn't restrict you to the passer, but that's how the ML features within Document Understanding help us. Custom model hosting and the AI center also help. We don't have to host the custom model somewhere else and call that service then pass it and do the post-processing within the system. It isn't a third-party service, so we know it's sitting within the system. If any issues are also there, we know where to diagnose and deposit them.

UiPath Orchestrator is a treasure, and UiPath Studio includes various packages to integrate with solutions like Salesforce, ServiceNow, and Excel. They also have mainframes, web automation, and the API package. 

Orchestrator contains a lot of useful apps, data services, and machine templates. From a usability perspective, the most valuable aspects are its custom activities, libraries, and object repositories. In terms of integration, I like the ability to use APIs and call automations from UiPath apps. The most valuable feature from a human-in-the-loop perspective is the action center. 

Our customers appreciate the support that UiPath provides, and they don't want to go with a third-party vendor like Microsoft Visio, Form Recognizer, or Google Cloud. They're hesitant because some integration is required. The lead times for closing queries are longer with third-party vendors. For instance, it takes me about two or three weeks to set up Document Understanding in my project. But it took us three months to establish Form Recognizer with a client.  

In addition to the out-of-the-box functionality UiPath provides, it can host our custom models. That's something that comes in handy when we need a custom model. So far, we haven't taken it to production yet, but we are still baselining the technology. At the moment, we are doing a baseline project where we try to perform four POCs simultaneously. We are baselining Google Cloud Platform, Azure, and AWS with UiPath's AI center and machine learning services and comparing the four.

UiPath's performance could be improved. UiPath's framework was built on top of .NET Core. It was a 32-bit platform initially, but they recently introduced a 64-bit version. Let's say I have a huge machine with 64 gigs of RAM. If I have a server machine and want to use multi-threading to extend my automation and multitask, the design won't allow me. I can't separate things into multiple processes. 

The platform is designed to go step by step. Parallel activities are not truly parallel, but it creates the impression that it's running in parallel. For example, if you're on the left segment within a parallel activity, and there is some wait time, it doesn't stay there. It goes to the middle and then to the right. It schedules tasks based on a time-to-completion window and then takes them from end to end. 

UiPath optimizes the time and doesn't let the CPU idle, but it doesn't give you multi-threading or asynchronous methodologies. These are available in the C# and .NET framework but absent in this platform. It's a step-by-step process where you go through each activity. A casual developer or coder who wants to leverage UiPath should be able to. I'm not saying that the working code is not there, but it's quite basic. It doesn't support functions or asynchronous methodology. 

UiPath is attempting to make it easier for a citizen developer to automate processes. They don't have to know how to code, but a citizen developer can't do it when the use case becomes more complex. When they advertise that one doesn’t need to know coding to program bots, that's only true for easy or intermediate use cases. We still need a programmer for anything beyond medium complexity.

The marketing could be improved because the methodologies went from waterfall COE to an automated operation model. However, people are trying to do automation in an Agile model, but it's not exactly executable that way. When customers see the demos from UiPath, they expect that the results will be significant, and they are. However, we might try to automate something, and we’re unsure whether it can be automated because there's a gray area. There's always a 20 to 30 percent chance automation might fail. And that gray area is something that I want UI to focus on.

They have tried this with StudioX by adding checklists. The industry is not following this practice, though. I'm not sure how they should ensure that it gets followed within the platform, but the delivery model needs to improve. It's still niche. 

Another thing to consider is the work-life balance of the developer and the solution architect. The overall challenge of automation tends to become exponentially complex over time. For example, let's look at one aspect: the account tables. I can go to the account tables from a simple PDF perspective. The PDF is readable by the board, and the solution can extract all the data and do the account tables within SAP or Ariba and mix all of it and then submit a report to the business.

This can be extended to intelligent document processing using form recognizer and custom models, then passers, pre-processing, post-processing, and sending the report to the business. The complexity of it can be extended quite a lot. There should be a framework or methodology in place to hedge the bet so that it's not too complex and doesn't disrupt the life of a developer, solution architect, or business analyst. 

If the automation becomes too complex and challenging, our support team won't be able to sustain it in the long run. Once the development team is gone, the automation will die two or three months down the line. It's a balance to manage the complexity and extent of our automation.  

We've been using UiPath for a little more than four years. 

Resource utilization is one area where UiPath is lacking. UiPath says that the solution will run fine on a machine with four gigs of RAM, and they recommend horizontal scaling, but I suggest a mix of horizontal and vertical scaling. 

I've seen implementations on giant machines with high-density VMs and five users logged into the same VM. Therefore, the resource utilization isn't optimal. The RAM and CPU are not completely utilized. It only executes processes on a segment of the resources. I think that can improve. 

I rate UiPath's support nine out of ten. UiPath's support is excellent. They triage issues based on severity, and there is a clearly defined close time and lead time. Their support engineers will follow up with you 24/7 over phone, SMS, or email. 

The scope of support isn't limited to problems with the UiPath platform. We can reach out to UiPath if we are having problems automating a third-party application. They will help us if they have experience with the app. If they don't have experience, they baseline the issue and go through the log to do whatever they can to help us. We've had a great experience with UiPath's support, and our clients feel the same. Support is one reason UiPath is dominating the market. 

Positive

Most of the RPA solutions are fairly similar. The inspiration for UiPath's object repository was taken from Blue Prism. UiPath's integration services are like the connectors in Microsoft Power Platform. I'm not saying that UiPath is exactly copying everybody, but they're taking the best features from every solution and bringing them in-house. 

Other platforms are dominating in some areas. For example, Power Apps is more mature than UiPath Apps. I'm trying to add value based on my experience, and Power Platform's connectors should also bring value to UiPath. In the end, it shouldn't be redundant.

Every time we deploy the solution, we use an automation operation model. It's a massive document with policies defined on every level, from design to development, UATS, prods, escalations, business, teams, team leads, Agile boards, and reporting. 

All of that is documented from the start. We use that model to layout deliverables needing to be fulfilled. Once deployment progresses from one step to another, we have a way to document our progress. We've gone from a theoretical model to a UI model. It's not purely Agile or KanBan, though Agile framework and KanBan breakdown structures are there. However, it doesn't follow a scrum methodology. 

We're not on a two or three-week release cycle. One sprint is the entire use case from build to development and then from development to UAT to production. It's a custom delivery model, and it's working. Still, I feel it can be improved. 

Our clients have seen significant returns using UiPath, but their marketing could be improved. 

I'm aware of how UiPath's pricing compares to other tools, but it's hard because the offerings are different. It's not apples and oranges per se, but it's comparing an average tool to an excellent one. UiPath provides enormous value, so the licensing is justified.

I rate UiPath nine out of ten. It isn't perfect, but they constantly improve and surprise me. At the moment, I give it a nine, but it might be eight in the future. If you feel like some process will cause a lot of headaches, position it later in the cycle of automation. If you can save resources by automating, you should go for it, but you should be smart when deciding your use cases.

If you're thinking about implementing UiPath, I recommend having a design team that understands automation. You need people with some experience who know how automation is done. It requires some business analysts with at least a month of experience on UiPath from a citizen developer perspective. It would help quite a lot in terms of establishing automations that are relatively complex. Try an 80-20 approach operating principle when planning your automation.

The solution is used for automating repetitive processes within our entire organization.

In this particular organization, we've been running UiPath for roughly one year, and we've already been able to automate so many tasks that the solution has been enough to replace two individuals.

The ease of implementation is great. There's a large community surrounding this product. UiPath, in their workflow wheel of products, offers a really wide variety. I've tried competitors as well and I would say that they are market-leading.

My assessment of the ease of building automation using the solution is positive. There are a lot of different techniques or coding languages that can be used for automation. UiPath provides software where, instead of dragging from the ground up, I can drag and drop prebuilt functions that will shorten the development cycles. Rather than having to build something, I can just reuse something that somebody else already built.

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with process analysis and rebooting building, and monitoring of automation. They strive to provide all of those. The monitoring part is quite lacking, however, they are a quality provider in other aspects.

The cloud is great. I worked in organizations where we hosted UiPath on-premises, and not having to take care of updates or worry about the on-premises server, is a great help.

The Automation Cloud service helped decrease time to value. Rather than focusing on infrastructure, our focus is purely on finely automating our computers and development.

I’m not sure if the Automation Cloud service helps to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership. I’m not exactly sure how the privacy model is looked at right now if I compare the cloud service to the on-premise service.

In terms of having a SaaS solution and how fast we’re able to innovate when it comes to automation, in this particular case, the main selling point is that they have a really wide variety of automation-related products, which makes them the all-in-one automation vendor.

This solution helps minimize our on-premise footprint.

We’ve used the UiPath Academy Courses. We have got both developers and business people using it. This way, they can gain more insight into what is good to look out for when trying to identify automation. It's a very important part of UiPath. They offer everything from videos and other tools, which makes our team of experts not need to study anywhere else.

The community is quite good and brings value. They have authority. There are a lot of people who answer questions. UiPath has done a really good job in terms of showcasing the people that spent the most time there, giving them MVP statuses and more.

The biggest benefit of the Academy is that people get up to speed quite quickly with UiPath's suite of products. The only thing I can compare it to are open source alternatives. I haven't used any of the proprietary alternatives.

We use Attended Automation. Attended Automation helped to scale RPA benefits in our organization by automating department or role-specific processes that require human-robot collaboration. It has been a good way to explain to the business what RPA is. They can actually see if the solutions align and they gain a better understanding of the bigger picture. It's very important. At the end of the day, business is the most important place that we get automation ideas from. They need to know the potential of the product and Attended Automations helps them gain this insight.

While the solution speeds up digital transformation, I cannot say it necessarily reduces the cost of digital transformation. It has, however, reduced human error. Some of the processes that we have to automate are very repetitive, and when we must repeat this five thousand times a day, mistakes are bound to happen. However, if you make a computer program do it, it's more efficient and less error-prone.

This solution freed up employees' time. So far, we freed up almost two weeks of programming delays. If we free up one day, that's 168 hours per month, and doubled it will be roughly 340 hours per month. This additional time enabled employees to focus on higher-value work.

We haven't measured employee satisfaction in a granular way, however, from just what I've heard, teams are very satisfied that they no longer have to do these really boring tasks.

This solution reduced the cost of our automation operations, although we didn't really do automation before. This solution saved costs for our organization in general as well.

Monitoring and statistics need improvement. It's quite hard to export if you want a long, clear report. It's quite hard to do that based on the style and functionality. You have to feed in your own functionality to do this.

I've been working with UiPath for the past three years.

The stability of the solution is good. We've had heaps of fun since we implemented UiPath one year ago.

If we need to increase the computing power, in this case, it would be adding more robot licenses. We can simply do that by emailing UiPath and they will expand our license. It’s very simple to scale up.

The solution is scalable. It's very easy and quick to scale up. If we need more people for more robots, then we can simply just buy another robot license.

We use the one robot license and we have it at roughly 70%. We will probably buy another robot at the end of this year.

Technical support is great. I've used it on several occasions and I can expect answers within twenty four hours from their technical engineers, and they will speak with me directly.

Positive

We used an open-source program called OpenRPA. UiPath is a much bigger suite of products with a big community. We get a lot of services for free when we're using UiPath.

The initial setup was extremely straightforward. We sent one email and they set it up for us.

The deployment took roughly one month, and the installer set it up for us. It's more of a matter of informing and educating the business.

Our implementation strategy was to demo the product for a business, explain the capabilities, give them the information about UiPath Academy, and then based on that, move forward.

We handle the implementation in-house. 

We have seen a return on investment. In less than one year, we had already automated many tasks and saved time in terms of hours, manual hours, and days.

As long as your company has enough repetitive work where you can automate, the pricing is quite easy to calculate. If you save more money automating these tasks in the first half-year, then it's definitely a worthwhile investment.

You should take into account the different server where you actually run the product with a Windows license and the cost of purchasing the machine.

We evaluated the top five market options based on Gartner, and based on previous experience with consultants and colleagues. We then picked this solution.

The pros of UiPath compared to, for example, Automation Anywhere or Power Automate, which was my first alternative, was that they have a larger community. They also have a wider range of products. They have a wider range of activities within the products as well. They have in general, a stronger tool. UiPath is very broad.

We do not use the solution's Automation Cloud service.

We do not use this solution as much as we would like to, however, we use monitors with the Automation Hub to gather all different types of automation IBS in one place. All of our products are hosted on the Automated Cloud.

At this point, we do not use the solution's UiPath app features or the AI functionality in our automation program.

I'd advise users to follow best practices in regard to populating automation. It's a good idea to follow people's advice. You aren't going to make the wrong decision if other people have done it before.

I'd rate the solution a strong seven out of ten. The only lacking parts I can mention are the monitoring and statistics.