UiPath Reviews

I implement UiPath for other companies. My specialization is software integration and digital transformation. I also manage UiPath for some organizations. We're a digital marketing agency that helps companies undergo a digital transformation for data and analytics. We help them automate marketing and data analysis for researchers and the organization itself.

The primary use case is to help the marketing department collect data about user experience and interaction. We also automate repetitive IT work and connect it with marketing. In other words, we extract data from the IT operations to use for marketing purposes. UiPath is also used in every department to reduce manual work.

UiPath has workflows and templates for every use case. We use nearly all of them in all departments with pre-configured templates and workflows, but we mainly use UiPath for IT operations, marketing, and finance. And the three are our primary use for it. We build the procedures and generate automation. We use public, private, and hybrid clouds, but we mainly use public and hybrid clouds for our services. It depends on the client, but sometimes it's private. 

We previously did everything by hand because we had no automation knowledge or experience before we started using this product. Before we started implementing it for others, we began using it ourselves, and we saw a 200 percent increase in performance in the first three months after launching UiPath automation. 

At that point, we realized we could do the work of twice as many employees without hiring more. With UiPath, we can build, monitor, manage, and do many things that used to take so much time and account for a lot of our operating costs. The most important benefit was a reduction in the risk of human error. In addition to saving time and money, we can grow much bigger daily. We can automate more as we gain more experience, collect more data, and amass more insight. The benefits are compounding as time goes on. 

We only had two or three clients when we started working as integrators and service providers two years ago, but we've grown significantly since then. It became harder to handle as we started getting more clients and revenue. That's why having an easy-to-use solution that allows end-to-end automation without much effort is crucial.

You need end-to-end control and easy management when doing this work for multiple clients or providing support to other teams. It's vital to have end-to-end capabilities without complications, making things harder for us. UiPath is helping the company grow faster and making our operations more efficient. We can automate the specifics of finding out how much everyone is working, enabling us to recognize and reward hard-working employees. Without automating the process of understanding every employee's impact, we could never find this out. For example, some employees may work longer than others, but they might be less effective. It's challenging to discover this without tools driven by AI and machine learning. 

Overall, it has streamlined how we generate, use, and store business data, saving thousands of hours of manual work. This Automation Cloud app feature doubles the benefits of UiPath by enabling us to generate apps from the data we collect and the automations we create. Ultimately, this translates into considerable savings in time and money.

Automation Cloud has helped tremendously by turning complicated, complex coding work into drag-and-drop templates, so we can build automated processes in minutes. It has enabled us to realize a lot of value from our employees who lack coding knowledge. They can now participate and create apps for us and our clients. 

Most other tools lack enough documentation, or the onboarding experience has a steep learning curve. It's hard for junior employees who lack coding or data experience. The fact that UiPath is accessible is crucial for our employees and those who work for the organizations we help monitor and manage. UiPath is an industry leader in enabling everyone to learn, and they provide rich visual courses that take you from A to Z. I usually don't have to hold a junior developer's hand and answer lots of questions. I only need to send the links.

The material UiPath provides is enough for them to get started. With other tools, we always have to turn to the community and YouTube videos or Google how to do something. They also don't get the complete picture of the use cases or what to do. After using UiPath Academy courses, they have a comprehensive understanding of everything and can easily find whatever they are searching for in the documentation or the academic studies. So it's a very mastering point for them to provide these courses and enable it for everyone.

We like how UiPath is designed for low-code or no-code users. It's less complicated, enabling everyone to use it with only a basic knowledge of automation or data. Generally, I also like UiPath's ability to mine processes and analyze user interactions to generate analytics.

Through task mining, UiPath can generate AI-powered analysis, and it has a Document Understanding feature that enables it to extract information from submitted images and data. We also appreciate the added value UiPath provides for customer service and user experience. It can automate ticket handling and responses. This has saved thousands of hours. Document Understanding has made a massive difference by analyzing and extracting everything from user submissions, then putting it into tickets and generating customer satisfaction scores. 

A task capture feature enables you to capture the workflow from a process and record it. This feature isn't as specific as I would like. It should be able to capture every detail. The same goes for process mining when it comes to system loads. It's already the best, but I think it could be better. 

I need all details of a log file from every software and ERP to discover the pain points and bottlenecks. It usually understands where the most automation value is delivered but could generate more valuable information. Sometimes it's the same data from a different ERP, but it doesn't generate the same insight from it 100 percent. There's a slight difference, whereas they are supposed to be practically the same.

I also think the UiPath community needs more attention in terms of how they engage with the community and what they recommend. I find that they hardly engage with the community compared to others. To be clear, I think they are doing well, but they could do better at engaging with the community and encouraging community members to engage with one another. I feel like it's not the most active community with the most active management. At the same time, there's also much information in the community, and they're always sharing information with us. Still, I think UiPath could achieve a better experience by putting a little more effort into the forums. 

I have been using UiPath for about four years.

I rate UiPath support a seven out of ten. 

Neutral

I have previously tried IBM Process Mining, Automation Anywhere, and Blue Prism. I think the ease of building automations is the main thing that differentiates UiPath from the rest. There's a single-user interface that gives you the ability to create automated processes without much advanced data or logical knowledge. We can find pre-configured commissions for specific use cases for our clients, but we also build custom services for specific users. 

Compared to other automation tools, it's much easier to build and manage workflows and find an opportunity for more automation within the interactions. And I barely plan for automation by myself. UiPath's end-to-end automation also separates it from its competitors, which tend to have separate tools for each operation. Mining is separated from RPA, but UiPath provides an all-in-one end-to-end automation tool. 

I rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

We develop and deploy use cases in the area of the cloud. We have deployed over 100 use cases. Most of our use cases are related to SAP applications, web applications, and mainframe applications.

One use case example is related to mainframe applications. The bot monitors mainframe applications 24/7. If there are any new jobs, they are identified, then the bot changes the status of the job to differentiate it. 

Previously, we are using the 2016 version of Orchestrator, then we upgraded to the 2018 version of Orchestrator. Some clients are deploying the 2020 version. It depends on the client. We suggest using a version back to clients, i.e., the 2019 version. 

We automate retail, sales, and agricultural services.

There are a bunch of candidates being monitored 24x7. Automation Cloud monitors these jobs, and whenever new docs come into the application, it will then change the status manually based upon certain conditions. Once we deploy the automation into the production, our manpower has been reduced so there are only one or two people needed for the backup. The rest will be taken care of by the automation itself. So, there has been a drastic reduction in our workforce.

We schedule different jobs using Orchestrator only. We have a separate team who takes care of jobs that we apply in Orchestrator. So, if there are any failures, it will automatically send email alerts to us. 

Within Orchestrator, there is a tab where we can restrict roles from the admin level to the user level. Developers give only access to the jobs. Whereas, admins have a roles option to restrict access.

There are still some areas that need improvements. Currently, the tool is not 100 percent accurate with hand written notes and image based automation. It is also tedious using it with Word applications. 

We are doing automation to take care of all our processes, but we still need support people 24/7 to monitor these jobs. So, human intervention is still there. We have two people monitoring these automations 24/7 because there are still some challenges with the automation.

I have been working with it for two and a half years.

When new bots are developed, we definitely see some errors in the first few days, which are usually connector issues. Once the bot is moved to production and has a lot of enhancements and patches to the automations, we make sure that the automation is running smoothly. So, during the initial stages, it won't be very stable, but after a few enhancements to adjust to the automation as time goes, then it will become stable.

Once we deploy and release the automation into production, we will monitor production to see if there are any new challenges, different scenarios, or bugs that we need to fix. We have monitored the automation after deployment for around six to seven months, and the automation went smoothly without any issues. Because the automation is performing pretty well, we have deployed it to more of our workforce and their different jobs.

We have separate, dedicated test data in three different environments. Orchestrator has a database and email server, so everything is in Orchestrator. Apart from the servers, products, and services, everything has a separate operations team, which has eight to 10 members, who take care of everything.

Previously, they used on-premises services for the bots. Then, they asked us to migrate more than 20 bots from on-premises to our AWS environment. So, we have created a dedicated AWS environment for them.

The deployment process goes this way: 

1. Developers develop the use case in a development environment. 
2. Once that is done, then they will move the code to the non-cloud environment.
3. They will test the code if the automation is running fine or not. If automation is running fine, they will show the data which is running fine as a code to the client. 
4. Once they have the desired output, then we will move to the production environment. 
5. The operations team will then deploy that process. 

The first time, it is a bit tricky. Going to production, it will take around 20 to 30 minutes to deploy the first time. If there is already existing automation, we only need a patch to implement it in production, then it will take roughly five to 10 minutes to apply.

The process of testing and deploying code takes roughly one to four nights maximum.

For deploying UiPath, we need at least three to four RPA developers. In general, one person can deploy at any time. The other two to three people are just there on support calls. 

Post-production, we have an operations team of eight to 10 members who take care of the automation.

There are some automations that save us thousands of hours monthly. These are automations that we run 24/7 as well as some automations that we run every five minutes for installing backups. Depending upon the amount of time the automation is standing, we will manage the capabilities of the server. 

To some extent, it has reduced the operations:

1. The automation is sending an email whenever there will be an error. Automatically, it is not going to the user. The user just needs to verify their emails. 
2. Whenever an error is noticed in the code, the automation will fit the address and email the operations team members. 

In these ways, it has helped to reduce operation costs, but not completely.

There are three types of licenses: unattended, attended, and developer.

We also use Automation Anywhere (version 10) and Blue Prism automation tools, but I think most clients prefer UiPath. There are more activities available in UiPath versus the Automation Anywhere version that we use. For example, UiPath has database-related activities, but Automation Anywhere, version 10, does not have this feature. I have tried using mainframe appliances in UiPath and Automation Anywhere, and I found that UiPath is more flexible and has more options available.

The solution is single sign-on, so the authentication is done for us, because it is difficult to remember all our passwords.

We have a ServiceNow ticketing tool for reporting issues related to UiPath.

UiPath is very good for developing web-based applications, especially for SAP and the web. For these two applications, you can go with UiPath without any doubts.

I would rate this solution as an eight (out of 10).

I have used UiPath Orchestrator, and we have created both attended and unattended robots for our clients.

We have been using the new AI and OCR technologies with UiPath, and we are currently trying to implement the Citrix log capability that was recently introduced.

We are not running our automations in a virtual environment. When we automate any Citrix-based application, it's all email-based. There is a Citrix receiver and we communicate with that, which helps automate Citrix applications much faster.

Most of the clients I had seen have been running in virtual environments, although I have seen some of our clients running on the desktop. We have also seen hybrid scenarios.

One thing is that virtual environments can be standardized pretty quickly. So, that's an advantage. Normally, the companies, which are leaning towards more cloud now, will be happy with this. So, I think that is one factor. As you move virtual machines to the cloud you can migrate your bots to the cloud faster.

I have worked on various different domains including the public sector, commercial, healthcare, energy, utility, and federal. These are the different customers for which we are implementing solutions. Now, the customers are moving towards AI and natural language processing. They are more into chatbots, how they can use artificial intelligence, making use of data science, and putting more machine learning on board.

With respect to how easy it is to automate our company's processes, on a scale of one to five, I would rate it two and a half. I'd say it is about marketing. You can develop anything. There are very small processes that you can develop with having minimal experience. However, when you start implementing complex processes, I would say you need to be a background developer.

On a scale of one to five, judging how beneficial it is, I would rate the training a five. All of my team members have been using UiPath Academy for training and certification. It's not just with the U.S., but outside the U.S. as well.

From the point that a UiPath license is purchased until the first robot is ready totally depends upon what use case we are implementing. There are different methodologies that people use. Some build the bot without exceptions and it can go to production. Like a very simple process can go to production in two to three weeks. A more complex bot will take eight to ten weeks, and depending upon the process, it can go longer. I have seen tasks when a human is performing the job and it takes him around twenty minutes per transaction. But, when the bot comes in, it actually completed that same transaction in five minutes. But, to develop that five minutes of processing, it was understanding system availability and testing. Then you have to do load testing. It takes ten weeks or so.

Our clients decide to implement RPA for several reasons. The first reason, of course, is to have work completed faster. Second, when there is a workload, you can work on it more efficiently and with fewer people. Consider an open enrollment in October, where the open enrollment starts at 10:00 AM and there are a lot of transactions flowing in. Now you have to hire a human and train them. With the bot, we can just scale up instead. Finally, the bots are errorless.

In terms of eliminating human errors, it is a one hundred percent reduction. When you implement bots, it's error-free, as long as you have implemented it properly. The robot does not get tired, so the error rate is actually zero.

I would say, more important than saving money, it's more about business growth and client satisfaction. Our clients all serve someone, so it's more about customer satisfaction. The employees benefit because sometimes they have to do repetitive jobs, and they get bored with them. So, they can use automation and apply their brains somewhere fruitful.

Overall, automation is always improving customer satisfaction. Response time is improved, errors are reduced, and productivity increases because work is being done around the clock.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is user-friendly. I was a coding developer, so I know how to write code, and I've also used other RPA tools. This solution is workflow-driven, where you can easily relay what you had written. If someone has to read the code, it is very readable.

Second, I've always been a Microsoft technology guy, and they have provided the facility where we can implement any of the C# code into it. We have .NET code, and that's why I like it. We say it's a tool, but I would say it can also be leveraged as a custom coding tool. We can actually do whatever custom code you want.

I would like to see more machine learning features and capabilities for more accurate OCR.

With respect to the stability, on a scale from one to five, I would rate this solution a five. It's stable. The thing is, with the software, we have a few glitches here and there, but what I like is that we have the right support. When we actually reach out to verify, we get a faster response and also a faster solution. The responses are effective and fast.

The responses are effective and fast.

I have seen some cases where there is backend automation, but it was a series of processes. With this solution, they combine all of it into one. There were few human-interactive automations. Rather, it was batch-job processing of databases, etc.

The complexity of the initial setup depends upon the client.

There is admin access and a whole lot involved. There are safety concerns from client to client with their security policies, and it may take time. I have hardly seen any clients where it's easy to set up, within a week or two. It takes longer because of the client's own security policies. You have to get a lot of clearance because there is a lot of admin access that UiPath needs. If I had to rate the setup, I would give it three out of five.

A dedicated person is required to maintain this solution. The same way humans get sick and need doctors, the bots get sick and you need a maintenance person.

I would estimate that our clients see ROI, on average, in one year. It depends on what they are trying to save. If it is FTE then eventually you'll be getting everything. If you are trying to have a faster experience, it totally depends. There is a development cost and a tool cost that have to be considered. It also depends on the complexity of the processes and how long they take to code.

We have clients who use almost all of the RPA solutions. The most common ones are Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, and WorkFusion. We don't recommend. We advise. We can implement regardless of the solution.

The choice is dependent on various factors. What we have seen is that most companies have a technology stack. Some have a Java shop, while others have a Microsoft shop, or others will use a different technology stack again. People tend to choose what best matches their technology.

When we started initially, most of the business users were afraid that the bot was going to take their job. That is not the case. The bot is actually helping them with their substantive, day-to-day work, by handing the repetitive work. So, after seeing the benefits, I've seen a lot of users now leaning towards bots, and they are very happy with RPA.

I am looking forward to the new version where they have implemented libraries. One thing they have done is merged the media packages into one. 

From a cost perspective, there is a difference between attended and unattended bots. I have implemented both, but most of the plans are moving towards unattended. The unattended bots come at a higher cost. For an attended bot, it is being used while the user is at the machine, and is more like an interactive bot. While there is a huge difference in cost, I still prefer unattended bots. I see less benefit in using attended bots and say that I would use unattended eighty percent of the time.

When I'm implementing an unattended bot, I am actually putting it on a machine. I can run as many unattended bots as I need on that one machine. I can do this with attended bots, but the thing is, you need user interactions. Now think in this way, if the user is not there, the attended bot is waiting for that user. Secondly, I see some of the use cases that are really helpful and suitable for attended, but I would rather go with unattended because it's going to show that I don't need a physical machine and it will be more efficient.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to start with the UiPath Academy and do the training. Then, look through some videos, implement a process or two and see how comfortable you are. At this point, you can move forward with it. I would say that it is pretty easy to understand.

This is a good solution, but I'm a hardcore custom developer. I still want that flexibility in my hand to do whatever I can do. With a tool, there are always limitations in terms of policy and rules.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case for UiPath is to automate tedious tasks in my organization and previous organizations. It's very friendly, offering free licensing, which makes it easy for people to learn and work with it. The ability to automate repetitive activities that take a lot of time is a significant advantage.

UiPath has enabled tasks to be done quickly and on schedule without human errors. It allows repetitive processes to be performed multiple times without issues, freeing human resources from tedious daily activities.

The user interface of UiPath is very easy to understand, and one does not need a technical background to learn it. The community is supportive, providing alternative solutions and quick responses. UiPath's flexibility allows for significant automation, reducing manual errors significantly. The ability to have an orchestrator to manage processes efficiently is another valuable feature.

There is a need for more videos and examples on upcoming enhancements and changes. If they can improve the OCR engine and provide more detailed documentation and multiple examples, it would be helpful for adapting to new updates.

I have been using UiPath for almost nine years.

Stability-wise, the tool is good, however, each upgrade requires a lot of preparation, as it involves changing infrastructure and testing new capabilities.

There are no scalability issues mentioned in the transcript.

Technical support is rated seven on a scale from one to ten due to long communication cycles before getting hands-on help. However, they usually provide solutions and alternative methods that are helpful.

Neutral

I previously used other RPA tools, including Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. UiPath offers free licensing for learning, which is an advantage over other tools.

The initial setup is straightforward. On-premises deployment involves getting the development package and deploying it. Hybrid models require coordination with others but are not complex.

While specific numbers are not provided, UiPath certainly performs well in automating repetitive tasks, which likely contributes to a positive ROI.

Based on past experience, UiPath's pricing is moderate when compared to other tools. I rate it at seven out of ten in terms of cost.

Alternate solutions evaluated include Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. Each has different strengths, but UiPath is preferred for its user-friendly interface and community support.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten based on my current experience. For people from both technical and non-technical backgrounds, it's a great tool due to its easy learning curve. The licensing makes it accessible for learning and development.

We adopted UiPath to leverage its generative AI capabilities for rule-based automation. This technology enhances the resilience of our automated processes, ensuring continued functionality even when underlying systems or data undergo changes that would typically disrupt traditional automation.

Our business challenges necessitated a combined approach of AI and automation. While automation initially streamlined processes, its rigidity proved limiting when faced with changing information. AI, with its learning and adaptive capabilities, addressed this by recognizing patterns and adjusting to variations. This synergy allows the AI to handle similar changes without requiring new automation, ultimately achieving the same outcome with increased flexibility and efficiency.

Our automations are now AI-centric, and this focus will expand significantly within the company as our organization refines its AI strategy.

Our company is developing a new AI automation strategy focused on employee engagement, partnering with Microsoft Copilot and utilizing ChatGPT for automation. While our AI policy is still being developed, we plan to carefully consider how to best leverage UiPath's AI capabilities, with a strong emphasis on security, once the policy is in place.

UiPath has helped save our staff time to focus on other tasks. 

UiPath's most valuable feature is Insights, which provides invaluable data on time savings and AI model performance.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

I have been using UiPath for two and a half years.

In terms of what we use UiPath for, the stability has been great. 

We utilize both cloud-based and on-premises automation solutions. Our infrastructure began with two servers and has gradually expanded to four. UiPath has proven to be a scalable platform, provided we maintain the necessary licenses.

UiPath's support is generally good, augmented by the assistance of a Technical Account Manager who helps escalate requests when needed. However, resolving issues without a TAM would be significantly more challenging.

Positive

Prior to my joining the team, the organization utilized Automation Anywhere.

The initial deployment was complex.

We collaborated with UiPath's service provider for the implementation, leveraging their expertise for the intake process and initial setup. Our experience thus far has been positive.

I would rate UiPath seven out of ten.

I recommend UiPath due to its robust user community, which provides valuable feedback that contributes to the continuous improvement and development of the product with new features.

We currently use UiPath to process birth certificates. One of my tasks was to apply OCR to the birth certificates and use a named entity recognition model to extract details like the names of the individuals, parents, and the place of birth. The project requires us to handle certificates from all 50 states, and every state uses a different format. 

We're supposed to be doing intelligent automation, but we're not there yet. I work in the applied analytics and statistics section, and we're supposed to find ways to inject more advanced analytical methods into some of these places where we can automate. Our IT department has a CoE that conducts intake processes. They use Automation Hub to review each process, and the executive governance board votes on it. I don't know how they decide internally because I'm not part of that. 

Automation through UiPath provided a framework and a low-code solution, which generally improved the process. It reduced the burden on the workers, freeing them to do what they wanted. 

It is also utilized in identity governance, especially within IT environments. For example, say I want to install a particular piece of software on my computer. There's a process to request access, and it goes through an approval chain. Ultimately, it gets to someone who has to click a button or provision an account. Someone will get an email and copy-paste the stuff from the email into another system and click "provision." 

And when an employee leaves or switches job roles, they no longer need access to a particular system anymore, so you must remove that access as soon as possible. Automation helps. Governance is one area that we would like to use it in more.

UI automation is helpful for interacting with legacy systems, mainframe systems, and various web applications. Someone might use all those things during their jobs, and many of them don't necessarily have APIs, either.

Although improvements have been made, such as auto-healing, there is room for improvement. Changes in the UI can break automations. If you upgrade from Windows 10 to 11, you may need to rewrite some of those UI selectors completely. That is probably the biggest weakness that I can think of.

I have been using UiPath for four or five years.

The solution can be fragile, but there have been significant improvements over the years. The unified target framework, which considers strict, fuzzy, and image matching, helps to stabilize the application somewhat.

UiPath has been able to perform as our organization grows or as the demands on UiPath increase.

In my previous job, I interacted directly with UiPath support, and they were always effective. Currently, support is accessed through IT, which escalates issues if needed, so I have less direct interaction with customer support.

Positive

I've used Python and VBA and experimented minimally with Selenium, but they're not as strong when it comes to UI automation. I've also used Power Automate for Microsoft products. Sometimes, I want to automate Outlook, but I don't want to ask the security to enable the UiPath activity to pull emails. 

We've saved time and reduced human error. 

I rate UiPath eight out of 10.

We primarily use UiPath's AI features to pull information from chatbot conversations with insurance providers and identify decisions made. 

Implementing AI and automation has allowed us to collect information quickly. We have deadlines that we must meet for our clients, and AI has enabled us to get that information without manual intervention. There are delays while we wait for insurance to pay for claims, and taking humans out of the equation enables us to be as productive as we want. 

We've been testing this emerging technology, and we're excited to see it continue to grow. So far, we've been successful in connecting, having interactions, training a language model, getting responses, and using that information to make decisions in the workflow.

The most helpful features are human-assisted and unattended bots. These features help us drive the workflow in the direction we want it to go. It allows staff to utilize their talents and the information they need. We can remove this small conversation and let them focus on the more important work.

Data integration is the biggest opportunity for improvement. We need quick connections to our complex in-house databases to set up automations more efficiently. It's time-consuming to connect those large databases. 

I have been using UiPath for about a year, while our organization has been using it for about four years.

UiPath's stability is excellent, and its ability to forecast stability is improving. We have a lot of stable automations running.

Scalability is a challenge as we're a large enterprise, but task mining helps identify issues and pushes automation into the enterprise effectively.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10.  We have strong contacts with UiPath, and an in-house team managing implementations has built a really good relationship with them.

Positive

I am not aware of any solutions we used prior to UiPath. We developed our own home grown tools and UI automation.

We've seen a significant ROI by reducing the number of full-time employees. We haven't calculated a precise figure, but it has been pretty successful, and we believe it is promising. 

We have done work for customer success by collecting information from various sources such as email, IVR, and chat. Our solution performs classification, sentiment analysis using the AI of UiPath, and then data validation and posting. We've implemented this for one of the biggest banks in India.

Our admin team benefits from an internally created ticketing system, which offloads repetitive tasks and improves performance. This facilitates time savings and enhances overall satisfaction within the employee base.

Customers find numerous features of UiPath valuable, including Document Understanding (DU) and AI functionalities. They leverage it for repetitive tasks and beyond.

Customer education is crucial. Currently, there's a time lag in training, which eventually impacts the customers. All stakeholders should receive updates simultaneously.

We have been a UiPath partner for more than six years.

We face no major challenges regarding stability.

Investments in hardware are necessary for scalability, especially when dealing with AI and audio functionalities.

The UiPath support team in India is excellent, offering professional services and tech support. I rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

We've been using UiPath from the beginning. We were also Automation Anywhere partners but decided to stick with UiPath.

While it's difficult to quantify precisely, we've observed a 10% to 20% cost savings.

Pricing is high, affecting renewals significantly. Many small companies are hesitant due to the increased cost compared to past discounts.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.