UiPath Platform Reviews

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 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 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. 

We are a consulting company and we work for different clients. I have mainly used UiPath for financial processes, like bank and vendor reconciliations, order management, order processing, collections, and invoice processing.

UiPath automations have saved a lot of man-hours for business people. They used to have to do simple tasks, like creating reports in Excel and calculating with formulas. We just uploaded the data into SQL Server and then connected to Power BI through UiPath. It was a small project for us, just a matter of two minutes or so to put things in place, but it saved them a lot of time. With the bots doing this "small" work, it enabled the employees to relax and work on more valuable tasks.

The employees involved have been happy and they have also suggested a few other processes that could be automated, after seeing the results.

There was also an order management project in which we extracted details, such as delivery date and quantity, from a PDF. Before it was automated, that was a tedious task. It took a lot of time for people to do it and their accuracy was lower than the robot's. The automation reduced the team size for that business and they were very happy. They saw a very good ROI. And it used to take the business much longer to do small reconciliations, but the bots are so fast. They are seeing good results. It has reduced a lot of human error. Initially there are some errors, but once you learn from them and train the bot, you get accurate results.

We have only done a few attended automations, but they have sped up processes that require approval. In those situations, they play a major role. More than the monetary savings, the benefit is that people can concentrate more on the important work, and with less stress. But unattended automation is the most important process.

The OCR makes it much easier to extract the details, as does Advance Document Understanding.

I would also rate the ease of building automations as an eight out of 10. It's quite easy in general. In some cases we need to use a coding language like Java or .NET, but we can easily build simple or medium-level tasks. It's even accessible for business people. If we try to explain the code or the architecture of our design, they're able to easily understand.

The UiPath Apps feature has helped to reduce the workload for our IT department by enabling end-users to create apps. Even some of the business people have been trained to do that. They have been able to build small, attended bots.

And when it comes to minimizing our on-prem footprint, I would also rate it at eight out of 10. We have seen good results from our on-premises build.

And if we are not sure about something, we can get help from the UiPath community. I have worked throughout the whole cycle, and in all aspects we get good support. People voluntarily contribute to the community. It is a vast community and we get answers quickly. UiPath itself helps people connect and they give badges and goodies to people who are contributing well.

Initially, it was mandatory for us to get certification through the UiPath Academy. The course is free and even the business people have been interested in upskilling themselves. All the Academy courses are very good.

I have been using UiPath for over three years.

The stability is good, but they keep upgrading versions. If you want some of the new additions, sometimes you have to take a beta version.

The scalability is very good, and with the latest version it will be much easier.

Almost all our departments have used UiPath automations. Management is trying to identify what else is possible. It's spreading to all our company's departments.

Whenever we have an issue that we cannot solve, we contact technical support and they try to identify the issue and give us the best solution. If we give them our machine IDs, they try to get into the machines and resolve things. Some of our cases were really complex, and they visited our site. That was the best part.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It is a little technical but not very complex. The deployment time depends on getting all the prerequisites in place but it usually doesn't take long, about two hours, on average.

Maintenance depends on the complexity of the automations. You have to monitor things regularly.

The ROI is very good. We have been able to deploy many processes and upper management is pretty happy with the investment they have made in the bots.

Compared to other solutions, the pricing is moderate.

We compared UiPath with other tools and then we made the decision to go with it. A few of our clients use other tools, but in our experience, UiPath is best. It is much easier to use, compared to the others.

We referred to industry reviews and we had discussions with peers and colleagues. I did some research into the market and then I chose UiPath.

Automation will enable you to concentrate more on the things that require decision-making and knowledge, rather than just doing repetitive tasks.

As we have upgraded the versions, it has reduced the time involved as well. Initially, it was taking some time. But once we and the whole business got used to it and understood how the bots work, things went way faster. The solution is improving every day. It has already moved to the cloud and it should start working on IoT because they have started with AI. That will make IoT will be much easier.

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.

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.

My primary use case is automation. I worked in multiple companies with the same product on the same profile, and most of them were automation. The actual business use case would vary from company to company, and project to project as well.

One feature that I personally found valuable was the orchestrator. It is a pretty mature platform as of now, and it was three to four years back when I started to first use it. It has matured quite well. They had a major change a couple of years back. Our company transitioned from an older approach to a newer modern approach that they deployed. The orchestrator platform was very well-suited to the new approach - as was the development studio. It's really easy to use and intuitive. That has matured quite well as far as I can tell. These two are what I liked the most about the product.

UiPath’s ease of use and quick deployment times were great as the cloud orchestrator, which did not need much of a setup.

To build automation using UiPath is fairly simple. The studio is quite easy to use. Even now, with the community edition, it’s great. If we want to learn to start or try out something, we do not have to wait for licenses or anything else. That said, we can also get an enterprise trial. If we want to do something, learn something, even during our personal time, we can just download it. They also provide a free orchestrator version as well, so it becomes quite easy to learn and develop. 

The building, deployment, and manual deployment processes, for small-scale projects, are very easy. If we need to build something, we just publish it, and it generates the NuGet package. It's very easy to deploy there.

The materials and the training courses are all pretty well-structured to get started with.

UiPath Academy courses have assisted in the process of getting our team up to speed. The basics were there even when I started out. I was not initially an RPA developer. I was into server operations before this. The UiPath Academy training really helped a lot with the initial courses, where they give you a tour of the platform and each and every activity. For audiences who are not much into software development, these courses can guide them towards that. The building blocks got us up to speed. They have very good courses there.

Regarding the Academy, it is a great learning platform for basic tasks. However, for more complex information, I turn to UiPath Forum. Sometimes I need some Python or C# scripts or am building custom libraries there. That gets shifted onto different platforms like Stack Overflow. We Google other platforms as well for the other types of queries.

UiPath Forum is a pretty good place in terms of the user community. Most of the queries that are posted generally get answered. Sometimes, even for smaller issues, we do not go directly into UiPath support and we first try to resolve the issues via what we find in the UiPath Community. Overall, it’s a pretty good place to solve our issues, and the community as of now is pretty active.

We saved time in our IT department since we started to use this solution. UiPath handles infrastructure for the orchestrator and its maintenance. There's a pretty good amount of time saved as we had initially had a server on-prem deployment as well. However, it became cumbersome to deploy multiple databases and they have some Elasticsearch requirements and security updates that need to be regularly maintained and in sync with UiPath. Due to this infrastructure overhead, our time could be consumed maintaining everything. Without them handling the infrastructure, we'd be maintaining instead of building automations and deploying them. We realized that an automation cloud would be a better option which is why we switched.

UiPath reduced human error. That said, we do not track errors in the process. It's a good metric to track as well, however, we currently do not track it.

It reduced employees’ time on certain tasks. The main purpose of automation is to save us the number of hours that the project will take. There are many other parameters, however, the time saved is one of the big ones. 

A weakness with Academy is that, with the current updates that they have, the newer updates, the courses are not up to speed. Nowadays, Academy does not feel that intuitive and does not give sufficient information about the product to the customer.

In our current use cases, we do not need much user interaction. One shortcoming with UiPath Apps is that it cannot directly integrate with the orchestrator platform itself. For example, if we need to fetch any assets, values, or cue data from the orchestrator itself, it's basically a web platform. Even if we develop apps and want to do something based on that data, they do not have direct integration with the orchestrator. We need a separate bot, which will then interact with the orchestrator and then pass it back.

If we need ten to fifteen users who might simultaneously use apps, and we want to run a process for each of these users, then we might need fifteen licenses to do that. That is something that has been holding us back from using it, as it does not have direct orchestrator access. We need a separate bot to get the data to perform some actions.

Scaling and licensing need major improvement. I know that they have released something called Serverless Cloud Robots, where the bot machines do not need infrastructure. However, we do not generally want to run the bots or the data in the UiPath cloud as well. There are some hiccups that do happen when we run bots on another machine. That said, it might be a good feature and we can scale up and scale down more effectively.

I've used the solution for nearly four years now.

The stability has been quite good for a couple of quarters now. We had some issues two or three quarters ago, where there was a downtime of around thirty minutes which impacted assessment. After that, for the last couple of quarters, we have not seen any issues regarding the platform itself. It is pretty stable.

The product allows scaling up, however, when we deploy and run the bot, the bot does not actually run on the orchestrator. The orchestrator is just a management platform. When we need to scale up bots, what we would need to do is spin up new virtual machines. We need those virtual machines in order to scale up. This, along with the licensing affects the ability to scale.

If someone does not have a license, it cannot scale up. When comparing it to something like AWS offers, or any other cloud service, where you can rapidly scale up and rapidly scale down based upon our demands, that is currently not possible with the UiPath. We do not get to easily scale up. We need to plan in advance as to when we run our automation, what time we need to offset the loads, and which automation gets priority at that time. That becomes a bit of an issue.

As of now, scaling is a bit cumbersome, whether we are scaling up or down, and the licensing also revolves around scaling.

We use both attended and unattended automation. In the case of attended automation, scaling is a bit tricky. We need to consider licenses. Very few need the same automation to run on one hundred machines. If we do, then we would need to find a way to manage these one hundred licenses as well. It again comes down to cost.

Our thought process is that whenever possible and where we need to scale, we try to avoid human interaction, and we try to convert our bad pieces into attended automation. If some automation requires a manual login due to regulatory compliance or maybe due to capture, what we do is have these login paths that we take in as unattended input. Then where it’s possible, we would run it as an unattended mode and maybe then pass on the output to the attended mode.

We have support from UiPath, however, I'm not sure what model we are on. 

The support is not as responsible as we would expect. It's not bad, but it's not good.

The response time, the overall solutions that they provide, and the workarounds are okay. It's a mix of everything. We've had somewhat of a mixed experience with them.

Neutral

UiPath handles infrastructure, maintenance, and updates for the Automation Cloud - the infrastructure being the orchestrator infrastructure. The robot infrastructure is handled by us.

I was involved in the initial deployment of UiPath in our organization's deployment process. The deployment process is pretty straightforward with automation cloud data, so we did not need to worry about that. The administration is pretty straightforward as well. They have all of these access models, folders, and groupings. It's very easy, even for a new user that needs access to a particular box to run. It's also easy to maintain.

In terms of deployment on the cloud, there is no overhead. The administration process is simple. Maybe it took us around two to three days of initial setup. Most of the time was spent brainstorming on how we would need to structure our use case. That was what took the majority of the time. Once we decided on that, it was pretty easy. It can be done in one day. The process is also ongoing as the requirements change and the roles change, and it always requires some sort of maintenance, taking out users, taking in new users, et cetera. However, that's pretty easy.

In terms of the deployment of individual bots, it is pretty easy. The manual deployment is also pretty simple. We deploy it from the studio. We get a bundle package and we upload it at the studio level as well as the orchestrator, and it's done. This is a straightforward model. We do have a CI/CD pipeline setup for enterprises where we avoid manual deployments. In that case, we do not use UiPath CI/CD. We do use Git and pipelines to push our packages directly to UiPath.

I can't speak to if there has been an ROI or not.

The licensing could be more flexible. They might have a different enterprise cost strategy for each of the licenses. The license is rigid in that you cannot generally scale up. To scale up, we have to have a license procured before we can run a bot there.

I am not involved in the comparison between Uipath and its competitors, such as Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, or any other platform.

We do not really have clients in healthcare, however, my previous company has mainly evolved into what I can say is a pharmaceutical supply chain. The company is an ordering platform for pharmaceuticals. I'm not sure whether I can consider that as a healthcare pharmaceutical or supply chain use case.

I had done some trial POCs around the UiPath Apps feature. We did some basic trials within our team, however, we do not have any end-users who actively use UiPath Apps.

We're still at an early stage in terms of using AI in our automation via UiPath. We tried out some POCs, and I'm also just getting training on that as well. We do not have any production use cases right now that go into full AI or ML.

In general, they have a good ecosystem of developers. It would be easier to set up and use it. However, if a new company has heavier workloads and needs scaling capability based on time, they’ll need to calculate their requirements. For example, if I process 1,000 to 2,000 transactions per day and I need ten robots to do this and it's fixed every day, then it's fine. That said, if I have varying workloads, where the workload is the last week of the month and the workload is very high, maybe I’ll need twenty or thirty bots to accommodate this workload, while, for the rest of the month, I’ll just need around five bots. That's twenty-five bots that I’ll need to purchase, with many idle most of the time. That is one issue that needs to be planned correctly during the initial stage. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

One of the projects we have been working on is for a medical company. It includes fetching medical records from the company's web-based portal. These records have to be pasted into Excel and consolidated. We then send them back to the client via email. We use Orchestrator to schedule the process to run every day at three intervals. It is running as an unattended bot.

We have also used it for another company to help with their employee onboarding process.

If we had to build code from scratch in UiPath, we would have to configure proper exception handling and log creation. We would also have to connect it to Orchestrator queues. But with the predefined REFramework (Enhanced Robotic Enterprise Framework) template, those requirements have been built already. All we have to do is invoke our code in one of the four states: Init, Get Transaction, Process Transaction, and End Process. Because it is connected to Orchestrator's queues, we can then run the process.

We have also been able to develop our code based on UiPath's security and compliance credentials. UiPath supports confidentiality. Until now, we have never faced a security problem. It is the most secure RPA tool.

Another benefit is that UiPath automation saves our clients time. During our requirements gathering, one client told us that the process they wanted to be automated takes around 15 to 30 minutes to complete when done manually. As a result of the solution we implemented using UiPath, it is now completed within two minutes.

There are two features that I find to be the most valuable in UiPath. 

One is Orchestrator because it allows us to manage the bots and processes. For example, we can monitor unattended bots' run history and their logs. We can also modify our code based on screenshots by logging the screenshots and then viewing the logs in an Orchestrator job. That helps us trace errors and rectify them.

The second valuable feature is REFramework which is a pre-defined template built with proper exception handling and logging activities. Those aspects help developers to develop code properly.

In addition, I have implemented UiPath with ABBYY FlexiCapture for some projects, and that has been very helpful for successfully completing those projects and providing a positive impact for our customers. It makes it very easy to extract data from a PDF and then build code to process it in UiPath. The integration of ABBYY FlexiCapture with UiPath is a very good feature.

When it comes to REFramework, we need more training videos and tutorial documents for beginners. 

And while there are a lot of videos to learn about basic activities in UiPath, we need more documents and key points on how to connect third-party connectors. That would be very helpful for beginners and for quick implementation.

I've been working in UiPath for almost two years. I use it daily.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

The scalability is also excellent.

Sometimes technical support will get stuck on how to execute further, but we raise our queries in the UiPath Community Forum. There are so many RPA developers there and we get quick replies from them. We're able to build solutions based on their information. The forums are very useful for us.

Positive

I used to use Blue Prism.

I have seen a lot of return on investment with UiPath because it enables quicker implementation of automations.

When I compared the basics between Blue Prism and UiPath, I felt UiPath was much better.

With Blue Prism it takes a lot of time to build code and workflows. For example, to fetch data from Excel within UiPath only one activity is needed, called Read Range. But Blue Prism requires use of three activities to do the same thing. First, I have to open the Excel instance, then open the worksheet, and then fetch the data from the worksheet. Using UiPath means quicker implementations. 

And there are a lot more features in UiPath when compared to Blue Prism, and I haven't seen any disadvantages of UiPath. Using it, there is a solution for every process. There is no such thing as a process that cannot be done in UiPath. UiPath is the best solution for RPA and for our customers.

UiPath doesn't require any maintenance.

We are able to build workflows very quickly and it doesn't take that much coding knowledge to learn and understand UiPath. Beginners are able to learn it quickly and get into the businesses.

Choose UiPath. It is more helpful than any other tool for implementing solutions quickly and creating customer satisfaction. Based on my experience, UiPath is the best tool for automating RPA projects and repetitive processes.