UiPath Reviews

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.

I am a consultant working on RPA solutions in general. UiPath is one of the solutions that I am using.

The use cases depend on the clients. I have done automation of sending mail with invoices in it. We have used it for analyzing PDF documents, getting information out of these documents, preparing in three different languages depending on the client, and sending invoices by email.

We are also checking VAT numbers on the EU side to validate the client's VAT numbers and related data. We have automated the generation of reports out of SAP for two different managers and teams. We have also automated including specific signature images within PDF documents and sending them to the related service or email address.

We have mainly used UiPath to focus on processes related to the finance department. The targeted processes are the ones that are the most repeatable and require a lot of effort but there is no real focus and attention from the user. Because of its repeatable nature, the risk is that users do not pay attention to the process itself and make mistakes.

Generally, we do not implement end-to-end automation. The idea is not to automate an end-to-end process but to automate a part of the process that takes a lot of time and resources. That is the focus point, so it is not a matter of having an end-to-end process implemented. It may occur, but often, it is a part of the process where the focus needs to be reliability or time and resource consumption.

The benefit for our clients is time and reliability. They quite often see the benefits in terms of the reliability of executing the process, even reporting mistakes or errors that happen during the execution of the process. That is something quite valuable for them.

Usually, it takes our clients at least one month to realize the benefits. If the processes are executed on a daily basis, then it is quite fast, but there are processes that are triggered every month or every quarter. In that case, it will take at least a month or a quarter to see the benefits. Once it is executed, there is quite an immediate benefit. On the other hand, it takes time to analyze the process because often processes or procedures that are written are not in sync with what is executed by the user. We have to modify them. Often, by questioning the end user, you end up finding the shortcuts and implementing them, so the analysis takes more time, and the implementation takes less time.

UiPath reduces human error. That is one of the main reasons why automation is done for customers. Two main reasons for automation are reliability and resource availability. 

UiPath saves time for our customers, but it is hard to know how much time it has saved because it varies from process to process. For example, the process of validating the VAT numbers on the EU website used to take two or three resources every quarter, whereas now, it is reduced to less than half an hour. These time savings are valuable, but the added value is reliability.

UiPath has not had a lot of impact on the digital transformation because the processes that are requested to be automated are already digital. The reason for automation is to speed up the process or make it more reliable. There is no real impact on the digitization of processes.

In terms of the reduction in the on-premises footprint, I am not always aware of the eventual use of the processes that I am implementing for the clients with the bots. I see that some of the bots are not used anymore because they have their own application that includes a big part of what has been automated on their side. It depends on the way they use it and how often they use it because I have bots that are running every day, and I also have bots that are running once a quarter. The ones that are running every quarter are harder to evaluate because people are not always able to see the resources released from executing those processes. Because they are executed every quarter, they are usually not measured. Our clients generally go for automation for reliability.

Specifically in the recent versions, the ability to change the interface is valuable. One of my clients had to upgrade the SAP version and move to a web-based UI. This was handled by isolating the UI interaction within the library for the targeted SAP on the client side. I upgraded that library to handle the web-based, and the bots worked fine after that without modifying anything in them. The usage of libraries is very important for me because it helps a lot in this kind of upgrade, specifically because SAP is used across the company. It is impacting a lot of different businesses within the company.

It is quite intuitive and fully handled by a visual interface. It is no big deal for me. I have been a developer in the past, and I have used Visual Basic and C#. If I need to specify something exceptional, it can be done. It is not a big deal. For me, it is very easy. There is a competitor with an open-source solution called OpenRPA, but for me, UiPath is far better and more intuitive.

There should be the ability to customize the building blocks instead of having to specify everything in every step. We should be able to combine these building blocks to make specific processes faster.

There should also be some kind of templates, similar to Power Automate. Power Automate provides templates for a specific context.

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

I am absolutely satisfied with its stability.

I did not have to worry about it so much because usually, my clients want to take control of their bots. They want to execute it when they want, so I have had no experience with the scalability of UiPath. 

I have not contacted their support. When I am developing, I try to make a bot quite stable. I am aware of what is happening and what it is doing, and I can notify people with logs or names of different events that are occurring during the process execution. I know exactly what is happening and where. It is quite easy and fast to diagnose and fix if there is an issue, but it is not often that I have to intervene in production. If a process is designed correctly and safely, not much intervention is required. Clients look for this kind of stability because that will save the time that they will have to spend fixing things in the production environment.

They have a UiPath Community, but I have not used it often. If there is something blocking, I go over there, but generally, I find the solution to the issues through my colleagues.

It has always been on-premises. The setup is quite straightforward. If there is some kind of Orchestrator to be installed, it is more difficult, and it takes more time. Usually, they want to have someone internally to handle the Orchestrator. I am more focused on the bots and the triggers for these bots to be executed. I am not that often involved in the implementation of the infrastructure of UiPath for the operational side.

Bot development duration varies. It depends on the process, but it can take a few weeks to several months. I have bots that were developed in two or three weeks, and I also have bots that took at least six months because they were quite heavy and complex. Generally, it does not take longer than that because then it will not be as valuable to the clients. If it takes more than six months, it is better to have it developed in their own software.

Bot deployment is quite straightforward for most of my clients because, during development time, I take care of environment parameters. So, deployment is quite straightforward. It is a matter of deploying and pressing a button to have the package deployed. We then set parameters in config files, but it does not take a long time to have it deployed.

Bots usually do not require any maintenance, but if the source of data has been upgraded or modified or the UI has been modified, they might require some maintenance. Usually, once the process is running and every source is stable, there is no need for maintenance. When the data source changes or the infrastructure changes, such as the main server being moved or renamed, then there is a risk over there, but it is not a big deal to adapt.

Generally, two or three people might have to investigate the cause of the issue. If the issue is inside the bot, it is not a problem. One person is enough. If it is related to external data sources or infrastructure, it may take two or three people depending on the segmentation of the clients' people in their departments and services.

I do not know about the exact price because I am not selling anything. I propose several solutions to the clients, and the client does choose one of them. If UiPath is chosen, they contact the official reseller in the country. In one case, I had the prices in front of me, and it was not expensive for the service it was providing.

I would recommend it depending on the needs. UiPath can do a lot of things, and I have covered only 20% of UiPath functionality. Based on my experience and the needs that I had so far, UiPath has been quite valuable.

I would advise defining your use cases. That is the rule for everything. Once you have the use cases analyzed, you can specify what is needed, how you would do it, and what is the best solution to have it implemented. One thing that I am doing is that I am mixing solutions, where, for example, UiPath interacts with Python processes that I have developed. Python processes provide information in files. Web scraping is not difficult in UiPath, but it is quite heavy. In Python, it is faster to develop and use than with UiPath. It also depends on the number of iterations and resources available to execute it. It is a matter of the quality of a particular functionality in UiPath. UiPath relies on the .Net framework, and it has its own limitations. It has quite a heavy set of libraries and frameworks. It is a matter of balancing what you are expecting of it.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. It is a good product. It is well-designed and well-executed.

I've used it to automate different types of processes. My first project was to automate PDF documents. The process was a bit lengthy for the client. The client actually used to enter the information into the PDF templates and get them submitted to the government websites. And once they submitted their documents, the government released grant payments or other stuff. Previously, they hired people to do the data entry. However, it was taking too long, and some crazy errors. They had to have a pretty formatted, clean Excel sheet.

With UiPath, the bot would choose the data, get the data from there, and then put it into PDF files, save them with the sort of renaming schemes, and then upload them to the drive and then to the portal. That's the first use case I got. I built up workflows in it and automated the whole process. 

I keep exploring it and now have other use cases coming in as well. There are more than 150 or 200 use cases for different types of projects. 

The process management is great.

The orchestrator is helpful. And they have something called live monitoring. If you have an unattended bot set up on someone's system or in a virtual private server, when the bot gets executed, you can actually monitor it in the live stream. You can open up the live stream, keep checking it, and look at the automation, and how the board progresses, and you can take control of the live stream in between as well if you want to. 

The ease of building automation is relatively very good. Most of the programmers and developers get hectic while writing scripts. However, they get bored. Now we can just create a sequence of processes. That way, we can train some colleagues, and it's pretty easy.

I've used the solution for a good cause, for a client trying to gather information from the Internet in Switzerland to reduce carbon emissions. They were trying to get a lot of information to raise awareness regarding emissions and businesses. I helped the organization implement a use case.

The product enables us to implement end-to-end automation. There are certain scenarios in cases where integration is required. It is important based on certain scenarios or use cases.

The user community is great. When I was starting out, I really got a lot of help from the forum. The community is very good. The most common questions are already being answered there, and everyone is engaged. The community is pretty strong. You can just post your question in theory and get a reply real quick.

The solution has helped to minimize our on-premises footprint. You can just get it all done on the cloud. They have recent updates coming in in which you don't need to install any tool on your system. You can just develop your workflow on the cloud as well. 

It really helps non-technical people. I don't need to go through the hassle of installation. I just go to the cloud and start developing the basic workflow.

The UiPath Academy is good. I didn't have a chance to do a lot of the Academy yet. I have had one or two trainings for the implementation methodologies. That said, mostly I've learned through real-time projects or through my self-learning, plus the content we have on the Internet. 

The AI functionality is used in our automation programs. It has documented understanding. It has built-in trained models that help understand the document. You simply go to the document, scan, install the package, and just train your invoices and the data you have with similar invoices. It helps you to identify the invoices and extract information from the structured data. 

UiPath has helped speed up digital transformation and significantly reduced the cost of digital transformation.

It's helped reduce human error. Being able to have RPA enter information again and again really helps solve the problem of dealing with random errors. 

UiPath frees up employee time for other stuff. It helps optimize time and make everything efficient. Whether it's attended or unattended mode, it really helps employees. We can save a lot of hours. The automation hub that they offer can upload all the stats. It will take a process and tell you how many hours you could save. The cost savings are directly proportional to the time savings.

I used to have some workflows that were a bit lengthy, and I just see that some of the time, they crash. It's unstable if the workflow is long. Sometimes you'll run an update, and it will make a workflow crash. 

They could make it more user-friendly. 

I've been using the solution for around four years.

The solution does crash sometimes. 

In one instance, I was trying to read a file, and the file itself was a bit larger. It's hard to read a large number of files.

The scalability is good. I would rate it eight out of ten. 

I haven't contacted technical support that often. I only reached out to get more information on a certain case. 

Positive

I did not use any alternative previously. However, since using UiPath, I've also used Power Automate and Selenium. Selenium is not a direct competitor. However, I have used it a lot. Power Automate doesn't have the robust community or forums that UiPath has. That said, it costs less. 

I'm an implementor. I deploy solutions for my clients. 

The cloud implementation of UiPath is straightforward. If you are knowledgeable of the process and you're good in tech technology, you can handle it. If you are non-technical, then it could be a bit of a lengthy process to learn first and then go ahead and do it.

The deployment can be handled by a single person, depending on the use case. If it's more complex, you may need a team to deploy.

There is maintenance required. If there's a change to the website, process, platform, or data point then you have to go in and adjust. 

The licensing cost is pretty expensive compared to competitors. 

The community edition, however, is pretty good for developing automation. You can have one unattended product as well, which you can utilize. 

A developer license may be around $420 or $450 a month, which is really expensive. 

I'm a reseller.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I would advise others, if they mean to use the product, to be specific and look at the cost structure. A small business will always need to be mindful of the cost structure. For a smaller business, the community version might be an option. 

Overall, the orchestrator, the cloud management, and a lot of their features are great. 

We do a lot of claims processing for healthcare providers. We handled the billing, and it was very beneficial for us to use automation to perform those claims management and submit the claims for those various providers.

We utilize Orchestrator, the robots, both attended and unattended, and team sites.

Our organization was trying to achieve better accuracy and better throughput with this AI-powered automation initiative. We were just getting all the claims processed that we needed to because we just couldn't keep up with the workload. Using automation was a requirement.

It is very important that UiPath has orchestration. Without Orchestration, we wouldn't be able to do anything we do. My team specifically manages the Orchestration, and after the automation goes live, they come to my team to manage. 

Without Orchestration, I couldn't comprehend how we could do it. We have 360 machines running over a hundred processes with thousands of transactions a day. Without Orchestration, I don't see how we would be able to use the function.

Unattended robots with Orchestrator are our bread and butter. We don't do very many attended automations. It just seems that they are much more resilient when we run a program in a way that doesn't involve any users. 

We did have insights at one point, but that was prior to it being re-engineered by UiPath. We have to pick that back up because it didn't really work for us back in the day, but I've been told that they've changed the vendors that they've used for that product. We've re-licensed it, and we're in the midst of reimplementing it.

We are working with a vendor, Namica, the UiPath vendor and we are starting with task discovery processes. We're just touching more on task capture instead of process mining.  

We would like to see better connectivity with different technologies. We found credential management to be something that is a real problem for us, especially working with third-party systems. 

Being able to manage those credentials and have a product that could help us with that would be nice to have. We've ended up using CyberArk WPM for this purpose. But it's not something that's prepackaged; we've had to do it ourselves.

I have been using this solution for five years.

I have no issues with stability. UiPath improves how the infrastructure works and how stable everything is. I haven't had many problems. There are a couple of quirks that different product levels will address or resolve, but it's documented pretty well on the support side.

Scalability is pretty good. We did scale. Our initial rollout was 65 machines within Orchestrator, and we have since gone to 360 with one Orchestrator and one tenant. It's pretty good—I don't have any complaints about the scalability.

When I need support, I need them to respond. I actually had an instance last week where Orchestrator was not performing well. There were a lot of locks on the database, and it was bringing the Orchestrator trigger down. 

I opened a ticket and marked the criticality level as high. There's only one above that, and I didn't get a response back for a few hours. 

I had to go back to my sales personnel and explain to them that it was unacceptable. There was a problem with support.

In that particular instance, it was pretty poor, but I hope they saw that it was a problem and are working to address it.

Negative

We used Microsoft Power Automate very briefly because it's just part of our Office 365 package. We've used it very sparingly. It was more of a means to an end than a plan. 

We're actually looking to use it with a UiPath automation that we've created because it's Microsoft-centric, and it'll work quicker and do what we need it to do without having to invest a lot of time in the development. It might just be a subset of what we do.

We're currently on-prem, but we're looking to change that. We're up for renewal in January and are already discussing that shift over to the cloud. We can utilize AI better if we shift to the cloud. 

I manage the infrastructure and the deployment of all the processes. I have a pretty solid background in infrastructure, so it seemed pretty straightforward.

We have a lot of departments within our organization that can do the implementations. But personally, I'd rather just do it myself and make sure it works.

We have an admin team that makes sure that the ROI is there before we even start.

The pricing is competitive. I like the solution's pricing structure. However, the development tools can have a better discount because we'd like to have more developers be able to do the work. 

In the long term, running the product and running the automation unattended, I completely understand the pricing structure there, but on the Studio side of it, UiPath can come down a little bit on the pricing.

The product is leading the way toward AI, and there's some onus to make sure that we stay current with what UiPath is doing. It's the other way around too, where they need to understand where we are and help support us and our program. It's a two-way street. They need to make sure we understand where they're going, and they need to understand where we are. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

I would recommend making sure your process discovery is done correctly because no matter how many automations you can put in place if you don't have a good understanding of your processes, it's not going to do anybody any good. 

Process discovery and getting buy-in from management are key.

Our primary use case is more of a reactive ad hoc use case to solve business problems on the fly. We can build automations to update thousands of records. 

We're putting a little bit more money and resources into it, and we're starting to go down more of the unattended automation path to actually do more end-to-end processes. 

The use of AI has freed up time and resources for other tasks in our company. We are a little bit more of an ad hoc approach right now. I just finished up a new cross-set of processes about two weeks ago that allowed us to onboard a client. I wouldn't have been able to without this automation. It would have taken a couple of months of several people's time to get them to get all this work done in the back end. 

It is helping. It provides value where we wouldn't be able to do certain things without it.

The broad functionality is the most valuable feature because it can interact with many different factors, and there are several ways to solve a problem. 

There's not just one cookie-cutter way to achieve what you need to achieve. You can get there in various different ways. That's a key aspect for me.

From the UiPath product perspective, this might be a problem because we're on-prem, but they add new functionalities pretty rapidly. It feels like there are releases constantly, and I don't want to update it too often. 

I feel like I'm behind even though I might not be. Sometimes, we'll go a year without doing any major upgrade to Studio or Orchestrate or anything. 

That's more of a personal problem, but that's because there are frequent updates to understand.

We started using UiPath about three years ago. We're a small company, an 80-employee bank, in Denver, Colorado. 

We're smaller than a typical RPA client. Our development is probably underutilized compared to larger institutions. Still, we thought it was important to get in the game early and start establishing the foundation of an RPA environment.

The stability is good. We have run into some issues that they believe are more related to their environment than to the application itself.

We're in the process right now of scaling. It is a scalable solution.

The customer service and support have been amazing. It is honestly the best product support. 

I have no complaints about the support. I don't even get worried when I have a situation. I might need to open a case. I like partnering with them. It's a good experience.

The initial setup was difficult because I didn't have a lot of past experience setting up a new program. This was a whole new program for us. Not only was it installing things, but it was also wrapping your head around how to set up properly so that we can get out of this.

It was a little challenging, especially with the on-prem solution and working in Citrix, to make sure these different servers were talking to each other properly, but overall, it was not too bad.

We're on-prem right now, so we're not even in the automation cloud. We're looking into that in probably the next year. The UiPath platform has been great for getting to understand those products a little better.

I see a return on investment. Even with underdeveloped automation, we definitely have a good ROI. 

If people don't understand the benefits, they might think it's a bit pricey, but for me, it's very cost-effective.

We looked at Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. It was three years ago.

I work in banking. We are highly regulated in our server infrastructure, so we decided to do a VDI environment that works in Citrix. 

At the time, UiPath seemed like the best product to work with Citrix which was a large reason why we chose UiPath. 

We wanted to make sure we were getting something that was going to play nicely with our environment. It has proven to be true to this day. 

We feel like we chose the right vendor.

Overall, I want to give it a ten out of ten. I have to give it an honest nine just because I haven't used other RPA solutions. But I love UiPath.

If you're going to go in, go all in. We didn't go all in at the beginning, and we should have. We're playing a little bit of catch-up because of that. My advice would be to go all in and be organized with your approach.

We use UiPath for robot authentication. We primarily use the software for accounting, particularly in our financial department, where we place some details from the client site, put them on a particular website, download the details, and then send those to a specific client.

I work for a big organization with many team members who access UiPath. On the client side, mostly enterprise clients, UiPath also has many users.

We've seen many benefits from UiPath, particularly from the client side.

The first benefit is manpower reduction, or reducing the number of people required to do the work.

Another benefit of UiPath is the reduction of errors. Sometimes, you'll notice errors from human intervention, but when the work is done via UiPath, you won't see any errors, so the solution has improved the success rate.

What I like most about UiPath is that it significantly reduced the amount of human intervention, which means that what usually takes people to do in ten to fifteen minutes would only take the robot one to two minutes.

I also like that UiPath runs 24/7.

I find the ease of building automation in UiPath valuable. It's easier to do that in UiPath versus other platforms, such as Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. My organization has a lot of activities and needs to give specific details and accesses, and I found that UiPath works in the final product.

UiPath enables my organization to implement end-to-end automation. Sometimes, it's required for the user interface, but implementing end-to-end automation still depends on the product and agenda.

The solution helped minimize the on-premises footprint of my organization, mainly because it allows you to do a significant amount of work remotely, so UiPath is the best way to minimize your on-premises footprint.

My team has utilized UiPath Academy, precisely the basic course, then the development course, and then the advanced certification. You have to start with the basic course that shows you how the platform works, then move on to the development course, and then the advanced course or certification.

What I like best about UiPath Academy courses is that you see several maintenance scenarios you don't get to observe daily. You'll see perfect examples of different scenarios in the videos plus the instructor has a good teaching style, so my team was able to understand the lessons easily.

I also found that UiPath has helped in significantly reducing the cost of digital transformation.

In terms of reducing human error, UiPath has helped decrease it by twelve to fifteen percent. Sometimes, humans working for five to ten hours become tired, while the robot can work twenty-four by seven without getting tired, complete the work on time, and ensure that all details it encodes are correct.

Because of UiPath, my organization doesn't need so many people, but you still need to manage the robot, monitor it, and ensure that reporting works fine. It's not like my team has to do another project after utilizing UiPath. Still, the solution requires managing routers, which now requires one person with UiPath versus ten people without UiPath, so that's one example of what the solution has helped reduce. UiPath helped free up about thirty percent of employee time.

I like the most recent update that was completed for UiPath because it helped solve the clustering case, and then the modern authentication is good.

What needs some improvement in UiPath is its Document Understanding functionality. It should be simplified because, right now, it's a little complicated to use, as you have to give it data or details, so in the future, I hope that could be improved.

I have been using UiPath for more than four years now.

UiPath is a stable solution.

Currently, we find UiPath scalable, but we still need to observe and monitor it for an extended period to check its scalability.

We have not had any issues with UiPath technical support. They've helped us a lot and have provided a lot of input, and we are satisfied with how they've handled different types of issues.

Our rating for them would be seven out of ten.

Neutral

I've used Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere.

In my organization, my team previously used Excel Automation, which means the team uses scripts and macros to automate tasks. However, there was a lot of limitation, while in UiPath, there was none, so my organization switched to UiPath.

Deploying UiPath wasn't as complex. My organization has a lot of members who can access everything. There wasn't any issue with deploying the solution.

At the moment, I haven't seen ROI from UiPath, but maybe in the future, I will.

I find UiPath a reasonably priced solution.

My organization currently doesn't use UiPath to automate processes that deal with good causes, but there is a possibility in the future.

The organization I belong to has not implemented the AI functionality of UiPath in its automation program.

UiPath is currently deployed on-premises, but the team is considering moving it to the cloud.

Sometimes, the solution requires maintenance, specifically on the server side, as that runs 24/7, so you need to integrate and do some checks to maintain UiPath.

I recommend UiPath versus Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. If you are using other platforms, I suggest moving to UiPath.

My rating for UiPath as a solution is eight out of ten.

My organization is not a UiPath customer. My organization is an integrator that creates the robots and recommends UiPath to businesses.

I work on database automation. We just delivered a dynamic workflow in an Excel automation as well. We work on many types of formulas. In addition, we develop physical automation. For example, we created a process that posts many photos at once on many groups.

We are able to produce output with UiPath in less time. Where a manual process takes one to two hours, we can develop a UiPath solution that takes 15 minutes. In terms of saving time, one bot has saved 60 to 70 percent of the time the task used to take. We have also seen human error reduced by about 60 percent. 

We have automated processes with 20 to 25 bots, and our organization is very happy with UiPath.

It's easy to go with UiPath. It's user-friendly, and any IT person will find it easy to use. It can be learned in six months to one year.

Also, we can use Orchestrator with Action Center for end-to-end automation. With Orchestrator, we can schedule automations.

I would like to see the setup improved. First we install it, then we log in with Orchestrator, and then we have to log in to the UiPath website. I would like all this to be merged into one setup.

I have been using UiPath for 2.7 years.

The stability of UiPath is a nine out of 10.

The scalability is between eight and nine out of 10.

Support can take a lot of time, two to three days to receive a response.

Neutral

I have developed Excel automations with Power Automate.

We are using the Community Edition of UiPath and it is deployed on our servers. We use it in one location in one department. It was not a complex process to install it, although there was a little bit of complexity to it.

If there is any activity or anything changes in the environment, maintenance of UiPath can be required.

We have saved both time and money and have definitely seen return on our investment.

The price of UiPath is not too expensive or too cheap. It's in between.

We have four people involved in deploying automation: one developer, a team lead, and two DevOps developers.

My recommendation is to learn flow development.