UiPath Platform Reviews

Oracle has three broad categories: HCM, PPM, and finance. I have used UiPath to automate mainframe applications. I have automated all types of automation, including ServiceNow processes, PDFs, APIs, and web-based automation.

UiPath has a large number of Java and Python developers. Its modularization of packages for different types of activities and automation is very well done. UiPath also collects suggestions from end users and developers, such as those using the free UiPath software. In fact, UiPath does not release its enterprise edition directly; instead, it releases a free edition for developers to use and provide feedback on the forums. This gives UiPath a significant advantage. Additionally, UiPath has made its tool flexible by building it on the .NET framework but allowing users to also use Java and Python. This gives UiPath another advantage over other tools. I am not sure if other tools offer this type of functionality, but I know that UiPath does because I have used it for a long time.

It can connect systems that don't communicate with each other, enabling us to share data between systems using bots, which is important in the healthcare industry.

The application that was built for our organization is not capable of handling millions of users because it is very old. We must consider the Citrix application, the mainframe applications, and the desktop applications, which are also old. They were not designed to handle millions of customers. For example, CVS Pharmacy has millions of people using its applications on a regular basis. Therefore, we cannot expose that application to customers. We need to build a new client-facing application, but we cannot discard our existing application, which has been in our organization for many years. UiPath helps our applications communicate which improves our patient experience.

It helps our staff easily share data between systems by saving the information in Excel or CSV files and connecting the files to new applications.

We use UiPath to consolidate patient data from multiple sources into a single dashboard, which helps our doctors keep track of patient histories in one place.

The single dashboard helps our patients a lot because we save patient information in the same way for all hospitals including doctors, nurses, and medicines. This means that if we need a doctor nearby, want to change doctors, or are moving to a new city and need medical help, our data can help us find the right resources.

UiPath automation has helped our staff save time, especially for invoicing insurance policies in healthcare organizations. UiPath automation has saved millions of dollars and thousands of hours by simplifying the process in both the healthcare and telecommunications industries.

UiPath has streamlined tasks for our healthcare staff, especially data viewing, enabling them to focus on higher-value activities.

We use UiPath's AI and machine learning capabilities to understand documents. The machine learning process has significantly improved the accuracy of the bot's ability to read data from PDF files.

In 2019, UiPath introduced Computer Vision activities for Citrix applications. This was a major turning point for the company, and the functionality was very useful; I had not seen it in any other tools.

The OCR engine is a valuable feature. 

UiPath should lower its prices because many other RPA tools have reduced their prices, and Microsoft is a major competitor because it offers RPA services to its customers.

I have been using UiPath for over five years.

UiPath is generally stable, but there are bugs in UiPath Studio that require fixing or restarting the application.

UiPath is scalable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used Blue Prism automation, but at the time, the functionality was limited and there were not many features.

The initial deployment is straightforward. We have some design methods. The dispatcher will handle input, the performer will perform the tasks. All processes will be transactional: our first module will create the transaction, the second will execute it, and the third will generate a report.

We use the CI/CD pipeline to deploy our software. After the software passes UAT testing, we need approval from the technical team before deploying it to production.

The implementation was completed in-house.

UiPath is expensive. Automation Anywhere is much cheaper, and it does not have the same AI and machine learning capabilities or features. However, for some industry cases, such as document understanding and computer vision, these features are not required.

I evaluated Automation Anywhere, which was not mature at the time but is now. I also evaluated Power Automate, which has the best price of all RPA tools and is capturing a large market share due to Microsoft's bundles and integrations.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We have thousands of people across the organization using the automation.

UiPath itself doesn't require maintenance but the infrastructure does at times.

UiPath offers a 60 to 90 day trial of its features so that users can try the solution before buying. We can also negotiate with UiPath sales to ensure that we see a return on our automation investment within the first year.

My current retail organization uses UiPath for finance-related activities like invoice generation. We also use the solution for pulling documents from any stored devices for customers. We save customer files like licenses, invoices, and other tax-related documents in the box. If customers want to use such files for any purpose, we need to extract them from the box environment. A bot will check for that particular customer-specific file, download it, and save it in client-shared locations.

Transactional details regarding whether a customer has delayed an EMI or paid the EMI on time will be updated in the system. A bot we defined using UiPath will do it around the clock without any human effort.

The most valuable feature of UiPath is the complete queue system-based framework because it is robust for all clients. If something goes wrong, we can define how many retries we can do for a particular request. In the next attempt, it can be achieved in a proper way.

The end users can expect the results without any manual intervention. This framework is very user-friendly, convenient for the developers or system integrators, and satisfies the client compared to other frameworks.

I would like to see more clarity in the solution's AI functionality. I have not completely implemented AI for our client. I'm trying to understand the areas in which AI will be more usable for my client.

The OCR is the only area where I expect a little flexibility and improvement. If you try to extract scanned documents or photos using any native or Google OCR, you won't get 100% accuracy.

I have been using UiPath for more than five years.

UiPath is a stable solution.

UiPath is a scalable solution. UiPath is deployed in one location with around 5,000 end users using the solution.

I also have more than four years of experience with the Blue Prism tool.

The only major difference between UiPath and Blue Prism is that UiPath is deployed in the cloud, and now Blue Prism is trying to be deployed in the cloud. Other than that, I did not observe any differences between the two solutions. Both are good products in the market, and customers are happy with both solutions.

UiPath's initial setup is easy.

Around two people are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance.

Our customers have seen a return on investment with UiPath and are happy with the licenses, pricing, etc. They haven't raised any concerns so far, and they're increasing the licenses based on the processes we are deploying.

I'm a system integrator and one of the lead developers of UiPath for the end customers.

I use UiPath in the banking and retail industry.

UiPath is deployed on the Oracle cloud.

I would recommend UiPath to other users. The users need to configure the environment in a better way. If an organization wants to utilize only four or six bots, it needs to plan ahead and consider how big it plans to grow in the next five years. Planning in advance would clarify how the organization needs to configure the environment and what challenges it needs to handle. That's a better way to start using UiPath as an RPA tool.

Even before the deployment, we gave an estimation to the end clients regarding what to expect after deploying the solution. We told them about the things they will be very comfortable with and the time interval they will take to know things. They are comfortable and 100% satisfied with the solution.

Overall, I rate UiPath a nine out of ten.

We are using UiPath for traditional RPA automations at the moment. 

We are automating rule-based, repetitive business processes, but we're interested in the automation opportunities AI capabilities present. Of course, transactional automation has limitations, but in areas where it is applicable, we have been able to use it effectively.

The overall UiPath platform, including the Orchestrator, Studio, and the robots, is valuable. UiPath's competitors don't do orchestration as well.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

I have used UiPath for six or seven years.

The solution is very stable for us.

It is scalable according to our needs.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. UiPath is customer-oriented and attends to the customers well. They're helpful when we have challenges and are open to our ideas. We've had challenges with technical support solving some tickets, but it's been excellent overall. 

Positive

We installed the on-premise version in our environment seven years ago. It was very straightforward at that time.

I was involved in the deployment process by overseeing it.

We have seen a significant return on investment. The easiest to measure is the hours saved from manual work. We've saved the equivalent of 200 FTEs worth of hours each year. There are also less measurable benefits, such as improved quality and faster throughput.

Our primary use case is IDP. We're in the Fed market, so a lot of it is all IDP driven. AI and automation are priorities. We're not exclusively a UiPath shop, but we're shifting to utilize it more because we know there are opportunities, especially in the realm of document capture.

For us, it requires fewer resources, and the time to get to the production environment is quicker. It hasn't significantly impacted our stakeholders yet, but people know the brand. When we talk with customers, they ask if we know about about UiPath and if we're a partner. 

We're moving away from the current platforms because they're less robust. The RPA tools we've used previously haven't kept up with the pace of change. UiPath is a leader that has continued to progress with RPA development and invest in improvements. 

We're still in the early stages with UiPath, but two things that will help are the Copilot and the Autopilot. We'll be able to generate new processes based on the learning that's taken place. It will have a significant impact on the things we do. Generative AI is not new to us. We've had these discussions for a while, and our CEO is well-versed in generative AI. Software companies are coming to realize the value and implement it. 

UiPath has spent the money on research and generating libraries. The out-of-the-box libraries are extensive. In the past, we used standard capture products, where we had to create all of the extractions in the zones and all those things. UiPath offers faster implementation. 

UiPath's pricing could be improved. The margins for us as a bottom-level tier partner are not great, which can be a hindrance, particularly when we present it to the customer. Other than that, I don't have any areas of improvement at the moment due to our limited experience. Maybe after six months to a year, we might have more feedback.

I have been using UiPath for several years, although I only started with this company a couple of months ago. Previously, I led a team for four years with another organization.

The stability of the solution has been good. I haven't experienced any platform issues. Any issues that arise typically relate to coding or interactions with third-party vendors.

Reflecting on my previous organization, UiPath was able to scale effectively.

I rate UiPath support eight out of 10. My previous experience with UiPath's customer service was really good. The support from the sales and presales levels and the technical specialists was excellent. They were all willing to help and work with us.

Positive

We eventually switched from our previous solution because it did not keep up with the pace of change. The company did not invest in their product and failed to keep up with the latest and greatest technologies.

It's too early to tell if there's been a return on investment with UiPath.

Pricing is a significant area for improvement. We see little margin as a bottom-level tier partner, which makes it challenging when communicating pricing to the customer.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We're still in the exploration and discovery phase. We're learning about UiPath's capabilities and how they fit into the overall picture. We haven't separated AI from our normal process at this point. I work in our company's contact center, and we engage them in many different ways. We talk to management about their problems, report large volumes of transactions, and work side-by-side with the agency to find trouble cases and where they frequently perform manual tasks.

UiPath has helped our customer success unit and various technical teams. We were trying to understand the industry's current state and the direction our peers are taking. We're not so focused on eliminating positions as we are on using UiPath to free staff to work on additional tasks. There are always new tasks in the contact centers, and if we don't need to add staff, we can redirect them to other areas.

We were looking at implementing most of the features. I don't look at it with a specific lens but try to understand where all the tools are and how they can best help us in each situation. I don't have a favorite tool but try to understand how to use each one in combination to give the utmost business value.

Being able to escalate quickly is not a strength for UiPath and may be a focus area.

My department has been using UiPath for about two months.

The people from UiPath, from customer success to various technical teams, have been very helpful. When we open tickets, they respond quickly and escalate to the appropriate teams.

Positive

We did have a different solution. Deploying the solution to our agents' desktops was essential, and UiPath's advancement in that space and innovation position was enticing.

The initial deployment was fine. We had an on-premise deployment and weren't using the Automation Suite. It didn't work for us at the time. There wasn't a lot of flexibility there. I understand that it's changed, but we've already deployed on-prem. We've grown, and the complexity is through the roof, so now we think it's worth transitioning to an alternative solution.  That part has not been great, but at least there are places for us to go.

UiPath is expensive compared to competitors. We're examining where the value comes in and their ability to continue being a leader to justify the cost.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We have multiple use cases, including banking and finance. We are primarily taking data from PDFs and manipulating it in Excel, but we also build some UI-related automations. 

UiPath has saved my team some time by streamlining our processes. Previously, it took nearly a month to complete the accounting processes, but we've reduced it to one week. Before we implemented UiPath, they were working day and night to complete the task, so it reduced the time by almost 90 percent. We're further refining the process to reduce the time to five or six days.

The solution has reduced human error, which also saves us some time because we don't need to go back and correct mistakes. It's almost 100 percent error-free. It saves us money from server costs when we automate processes because there are typically so many people working on the same task. It reduces payroll costs. 

The UiPath Academy offers multiple certificates, which is excellent because we're asked for certifications during our interviews and audits. We've completed most of the UiPath Academy course. There's a foundational certification, and UiPath offers additional courses when they launch a new feature. We can get a deeper understanding of that particular function. The best thing is that it's free, and anyone can access the academy courses. 

UiPath's interface is excellent and accessible to new developers. It's easier for beginners to learn, and the learning curve is shorter compared to other tools. If you know Python and any other programming language, writing custom scripts is simple. Other solutions like Robocop and Power Automate have less flexibility in the scripting languages you can use.

We can implement end-to-end automation in most cases because we can use a different language if we encounter any limitations. For example, in one of my projects, we had an issue extracting the data from a scanned document. After reading that scanned copy, it couldn't pull the correct number. We could clean the image using Python scripting, and recreate it so that the output was correct. If we reach a hurdle we can't get over, we can switch to a different scripting language. 

UiPath's community is another thing that sets it apart from other RPA tools. Whenever we get stuck on something, we can go to the community to see if others are facing the same issue. There are many queries in that forum. That's how my team often solves an issue. The forum will have the solution 90 percent of the time. It's a fantastic resource. 

UiPath could improve machine learning for its Document Understanding module. We have to train that model to pull the data from different digitized or non-digitized documents. The classification could be improved, but I'm not sure how they could make it better. 

Sometimes, we get an error when we are developing something in the UiPath Studio for Salesforce. It gives me an error when I create one line of code, but I don't get the error when I make the same line of code again. We also get some bugs when UiPath adds new features. If we're developing multiple activities on one core, it can slow the response times a bit, and it will take more time when we try to download the dependencies or other packages. 

If we're doing UI-related automation, updates to the website might remove a specific UI element, and it affects the code. That's a drawback to using UiPath for a website.

I have used UiPath for more than four years.

There are some performance issues during development. When we transfer a process from one machine to another using GitHub, it will work fine on my machine, but it will take time for the other developers to redownload the particular dependencies. It is not going to update immediately. 

I rate UiPath nine out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate UiPath support seven out of 10. Their frontline support agents don't know that much and often cannot recognize the issue. After contacting UiPath two or three times, they finally assigned us a technical person who could resolve the issue within twenty minutes. However, it took two or three days altogether. Our bot wasn't functioning for that entire time. 

Neutral

I have used other RPA tools, including Robocorp, Power Automate, and Automation Edge. UiPath is great for data manipulation. When we want to take values from tables like columns and rows, it's effortless because it's using the .NET language. I use Power Automate and Robocorp because some clients need to develop their processes with these tools. 

UiPath is better than the alternatives, but some of the other tools perform better. For example, if I have the same code in Robocorp and UiPath and run the processes at the same time, Robocorp will complete faster if we're only considering UI-related automation. In most use cases, it's the same, but Robocorp is a little bit faster when automating UI-related processes because it's directly selecting that particular UI element. 

If I want to click to the next page and process the data, it will be faster in Robocorp. In UiPath, it's easier to develop the code and configure the bot, but Robocorp is faster. 

Deploying UiPath is easy. Only one person is needed to install it. It takes around two or three hours to install and configure the solution because the file is larger We have to download UiPath Studio and other components

UiPath requires some maintenance. If the process involves a user interface, we need to adjust it when the website is updated and a UI element is changed. When that happens, we need to update the code that references that particular UI element.

UiPath is expensive compared to other solutions like AutomationEdge, which is cheap. Last year, it wasn't too high, but I believe they updated their licensing model, making it very costly.

I rate UiPath eight out of 10. UiPath is an excellent tool, and you can get support quickly from UiPath. One thing I would note is that you can negotiate with UiPath for lower initial costs, but they will likely increase the price after you enroll. 

We use UiPath in various internal departments to automate our HR, financial, and IT operations, including access management and ISO compliance to control traffic.

We have UiPath deployed both on-premises and in the cloud.

Building automation with UiPath is easy. The solution is user-friendly, and we do not require technical knowledge or skills to use it. With a little training, we can start building automation with UiPath. Customer support is helpful if we get stuck at any step, and the dashboard is user-friendly and centralizes control in one place.

We use UiPath for multiple end-to-end processes.

The UiPath User Community is a good place to learn and get answers to questions we have related to UiPath.

The UiPath User Community edition is flexible and allows us to practice and learn for free before taking what we have learned to our enterprise edition of UiPath.

UiPath has improved our operational process efficiency, allowing us to schedule processes to run 24/7 and freeing our employees from repetitive tasks so they can focus on other work.

UiPath Academy courses are useful for our employees. We also have access to the enterprise learning portal, where materials are available.

UiPath has helped reduce human error. When all the prerequisites are met and the process is fully automated there is a zero percent chance for human error. For the processes that are not fully automated, UiPath was able to reduce human error by 60 to 80 percent.

Before UiPath we had one employee tied to one business process and after implementing UiPath we have one employee tied to multiple domains. Our staff now has time to work on other tasks.

The most valuable feature of UiPath is the ability to consume APIs directly from any application.

UiPath is expensive, and its cost could be reduced to make it more accessible to small and medium-sized businesses that could benefit from it. The orchestrator and licensing cost should be flexible instead of hard-coded licensing.

UiPath is limited to one application at a time and cannot process two applications simultaneously. This functionality could be improved to support dual browsing, making it more efficient.

I have been using UiPath for almost four years.

We have not experienced any crashes of UiPath. We have experienced some slowdowns three times this year, but this could be due to our internal network rather than UiPath.

The scalability is good. We can adjust our workflows according to the conditions with no issues.

Technical support is extremely helpful. We contact support whenever we need to upgrade our volumes, and by following their guidelines and prerequisites, we can easily complete the upgrade ourselves. Once the support team responds to our call they are quick to resolve our issue.

Positive

Before UiPath, we performed manual integrations, but the types of processes we could automate were limited. We faced challenges automating any process where humans needed to make decisions or where minor tweaking was required between the target and source applications. UiPath has removed these restrictions.

UiPath is easy to install, and its representatives are flexible in supporting our installation. Upgrading our libraries and maintaining UiPath security protocols is also easy, which makes the overall installation process straightforward.

Two people are enough for the deployment.

We implemented UiPath in-house.

UiPath is more expensive than other solutions on the market, such as Microsoft Power Automate.

The Flex license is around $11,000. It should cost at least half that price compared to other solutions. We must purchase an orchestrator for each platform, which is mandatory and adds to the cost. UiPath should consider this and offer a more economical license.

I give UiPath eight out of ten. The cost brings down the overall rating.

Maintenance is required when running UiPath on-premises for the server, OS, and DB. On a bi-weekly and quarterly basis. We also have to implement tools for the firewall.

I recommend UiPath for large-scale and multinational organizations because they can afford the licensing costs. Organizations should explore UiPath before embarking on a transformation journey, as transformation requires significantly more cost than automating existing legacy applications. UiPath is flexible and can integrate with all applications.

I am a UiPath developer. I have automated web-based processes like HR and finance. I have also worked on a use case consisting of web-based automation, Excel automation, and email automation.

The solution reduces FTEs in processes that require 100 people for repetitive tasks. It really helps customers to reduce human effort and guides the robot to do efficient work within the schedules.

It's very easy to manage and automate Orchestrator because it allows plug-and-play models and drag-and-drop approaches.

UiPath should be able to adapt to other operating systems like Linux or macOS. The tool must reduce the activity required for workflow design. It should be made similar to Visual Studio. It should provide a better way to analyze the recursion functions.

I have been using the solution for six years.

Compared to Automation Anywhere or other open-source tools, UiPath's stability is very good. However, when it comes to very complex hybrid automation with high-density bots, where we require many third-party applications, UiPath cannot handle such scenarios.

PDF automation is very complex. Either we will have to use a third-party Python script, or we will have to build a custom OCR. We require good programming knowledge. The product must improve its stability. I don't see much stability. Though it is available in an environment like Mac, it is not up to the mark as it is in Windows.

The product is scalable.

First, we validate with the logs. In logs, we have to identify certain categories of errors. From there, we identify the root cause. During development, we rename all the activities to appropriate annotations so that we can backtrack them accordingly. If there are any exceptions, it is passed on to the Global Handler. If any error occurs, we email the support team with a screenshot. For example, if ten transactions have been processed and there is a system exception, we immediately send a screenshot to the support team.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It did not include the CI/CD pipeline. There were two machines. One was the developer, and the other was the production machine. We had to deploy it into the production machine. An Orchestrator admin and a developer are enough to deploy the solution.

To deploy the solution, we create the package and describe the overall process. We compress it into a new package and assign the robots with the machine key. Then, we create certain asset queues for the processes and upload them into Orchestrator.

Once all the assets are created, we assign a VM to the package. Then, we upload the package and map it to the process name. We add triggers if required, and if any change request comes, we raise the request, the manager approves, and we proceed with the implementation. It is very easy to maintain the product if there are no version changes in the applications.

The licensing cost is very high.

UiPath's cost is very high. When we transfer the knowledge of a robot to another, certain images are not available. It's difficult to identify the XML collectors. A proper annotation or guidance must be given to the user. When a new version is updated, the tool becomes slower. It is very difficult to maintain version history because of the bulk update activities. If we want to convert from Windows to Windows legacy, it is very difficult.

We get the input files from emails. We read the input files, extract data from the template, and open it in the browser. We worked on an engineering product. We used UiPath to get information about the testing and the model's integrity. Certain information was in the Excel file. We had to extract information on whether the model had to be tested with plastic or without a plastic cover. There were drop-down messages. We captured the values and injected the JavaScript modules to autofill the data.

Once the testing was created, we created a sample order. We filled out a form from the input file, gathered all the details into a summary, and wrote an HTML code for it. Then, we sent it to the client and informed them that the test had been created successfully.

For SAP, we did an auditing type of automation. For example, we automated payments and filled in all the information from the template. Then, we had to propose, settle, and release the payment. In SAP, we are using VBScript also. It has some complex scenarios.

If it is a PDF type of automation, I would recommend the latest technology called Document Understanding. I can define and train the fields using certain anchors and then go with extractions. Machine learning models are also possible. It would be the best way to do a PDF automation.

Calling an API would be the right choice if it is an API approach. If we have been asked to download certain files from SharePoint, we create a custom Azure application. We define secret keys, certificates, and IDs. We define certain API permissions. Then, through UiPath, we install Microsoft 365. We can then download the file. If the process is more complex, ABBYY is the best choice.

Building automation using the solution is easy. We need a little bit of programming knowledge for complex or hybrid automation. For easy automation, plug-and-play connectors and activities are readily available in the solution. We just have to get trained and use them.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation and reduces the cost of digital transformation up to a certain extent. We required a ticket-tracking system where we needed additional third-party software like OneDrive and Office 365 to be installed. For Box drive, we had to install SDK. We also had other solutions like Google Drive, spreadsheets, and Zoom APIs. The solution has helped a lot to minimize our on-premise footprint.

It enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is important for customers because they want to avoid repeated tasks. If a customer wants to search for an email and upload it in a different portal, they might have to open multiple pages. However, if we choose end-to-end automation, things can work in the backend. The Picture-in-Picture mode in UiPath allows the user to work parallel to automation. So, while the robot runs, the user can do their work parallelly.

I have not used the AI functionality much. I have used AI for a POC of a custom model where I had to identify objects from an image. There were many questions like how many people were in the image, how many cars were there, how many street lights were there, and how many fruits were there. I had to find the count of the people or objects and their confidence scores. It was a small POC with the object detection model built with Python.

The product has helped to stabilize standard and structured processes. If the data is unstructured or unorganized, we use ABBYY as a third-party application. We have to train and classify all the assets and forms. The robot trains the modules using the connector and converts the semi-structured data into structured data. We can make automation more scalable using third-party applications. The cost is very high, though. UiPath is not that stable.

I have used the Academy courses. I have also completed enterprise training and acquired a certificate as an RPA developer. UiPath has a very good community. If we get stuck on anything, we can get solutions for our problems. Currently, ChatGPT is also helping us in many ways. My UiPath skills are really good. I keep doing R&D on AI Fabric, automation, and other features. The community helps me to learn.

A little bit of programming knowledge is a must to use the tool. A level one automation or a straightforward case with repetitive tasks does not require much programming knowledge. The user can use the solution if they have knowledge about the dynamic selector and wildcards. They should have a little bit of fundamental knowledge of computers and automation.

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