Jiffy.ai Automate vs OpenText Robotic Process Automation comparison

"The biggest driver was the cost savings. We wanted to improve productivity and save costs. Therefore, we gave most of the mundane tasks currently being done by a human to a bot. Some of the mundane tasks were reading invoices and keying in the data. We are talking about 15,000 documents every day. That is a huge volume that needs a lot of people. With the bot, it is just a fraction of the cost, because there is a huge savings in terms of manpower."

"Its initial setup process was quite efficient."

"With the customization option, we can write custom expressions using its compatibility with Python or other programming languages."

"It removes the burden of having to do some tasks manually. However, we are just using it in production for a single project. It saves us a lot of time in terms of extracting that information. So far, it has made a big impact."

"The way Jiffy.ai integrates into existing infrastructure has been great for us. Our company is pretty stringent when it comes to cyber security and integrating with our apps... We've definitely had very strong scrutiny over this platform and this work, and even within that, it's been really successful at being able to integrate."

"It is a one stop solution for automating process. The modular way that is assigned and works together follows a certain logic, and it encompasses a wide range of processes in a very structured and logical manner."

"The most valuable feature is the computer vision or OCR. That has a lot of use cases in real life. A lot of man hours can be saved, as we've seen in the finance processes... The feedback I have gotten from the team is that the OCR is quite powerful."

"I found the invoice data extraction very exciting. It is really good."

"It lets us automate almost anything, even with the legacy tools. It is very easy for us now to automate with legacy tools, which used to be difficult earlier. We work with a lot of other automation tools from Micro Focus, such as Operation Orchestration, but these tools can only connect to the API. So, there was a gap when we wanted to automate older and legacy tools that didn't have any API to connect to. We can now also automate without any changes in the customer environment. We don't need to change anything in the way that the customer environment works."

"The solution has just not closed the gap of being accessible to non-IT users. If you are a non-IT person, then this all looks like gobbledygook. Maybe that is something that can be improved upon."

"I believe this is also being addressed, but a lot of the platform work, as we were putting in new versions or making some updates, was, ironically, very manual. It's improved greatly, but I would imagine that's an area that they're probably still working on, on the backend, to help when it comes to what we need to do for platform support."

"The solution's support services need improvement."

"They are still new in the market. Or, at least, they are still a small player. They require a lot of improvement in terms of learning material as well as the community developers. If you compare Jiffy.ai to an established solution, like UiPath, you can go to YouTube and find a lot of learning material posted by UiPath, partners, and other people in the community. However, for Jiffy.ai, you won't find that available in the market. Because of this it is very hard for us to find talent in the market. Most of the developers in the market are used to the bigger players. For Jiffy.ai, if you search a resume because you are trying to find someone who has used Jiffy.ai, you won't be able to find it. So, when we onboard a new person, we want them to learn this new system, but it is a bit hard for them to pick up because there are no external learning materials on the Internet."

"The setup process could definitely be better."

"Initially, in version 3, Jiffy.ai did not have support for containerization. In our environment, we are heavy users of containers and container illustrators. So, the initial deployment option was running based on individual hosts that we deployed in the cloud. That created a singularity in the way that we deployed services in our system."

"When using UiPath automation, we could just Google issues if we were stuck with something. In the initial days with Jiffy.ai, we could not get that type of information from Google because there wasn't much of a community."

"The UI or the UX has room for improvement. The approach for designing the workflow is not that straightforward. It's quite difficult."

"It currently supports only on-premises deployments. They can include support for cloud deployments. It should provide us the ability to choose a robot for executing a workflow. We want to control which robot executes a certain workflow. Right now, it automatically chooses the robot that is going to execute our workflow. It should also provide the ability to get filters on the outputs of the steps. We have each workflow as a step, and each step has some output. We would like to have the functionality to execute some script or some logic on these outputs to format the tests directly on the variables."

"The pricing is quite competitive. As a small player in the market, they are quite aggressive in their pricing. With the features that they offer, it is quite worth the value."

"Its license is yearly. There are no additional costs to the standard fee. It is a standard license."

"The pricing and license make sense. They have a model based on the concurrency of the workforce, which is very suitable in our case. The savings are great on the licensing cost."

"I like that it is very cost-efficient."

"The licensing is not expensive; it is quite cheap. The expensive part is to support and maintain it. Understandably, we engage them to do a lot of work that could have been done by our own staff, if we had an RPA team. I wouldn't hold that against them. It is just that the cost of support is on the higher side for us."

"If cost is of concern, then start with Jiffy. If cost is not your main concern there are a few premium products out there, but they come with a huge price tag."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"The pricing model is very straightforward. You can have a one-year or three-year subscription. You pay for each robot that you want to use simultaneously. If you want, you can install 50 robots and get 50 licenses. If you want to use only one robot at a time, you just need one license. For each license, you pay around 10% or 15% to support. You pay for the license, and you pay a small percentage of the cost of the license for support. This is their licensing model, which is very easy to understand."