UiPath Reviews

I piloted the introduction of UiPath to my team with two projects. The first, domain monitoring, automated our ten-plus Pega applications' quarterly security and health checks. We designed an architecture that could be mapped across all domains, streamlining the process to run weekly instead of quarterly. This provided timely reports on application health via Webex. The second project was a more straightforward test suite automation for another UI-based application. These two successful pilot projects showcased the capabilities of UiPath, with the domain monitoring still in use today.

Building automation with UiPath is straightforward, but it's essential to be familiar with the target application and have a basic understanding of coding and if-else statements. This knowledge will help troubleshoot any unexpected errors. Overall, I'd rate the ease of building automation with UiPath an eight out of ten.

While working on the projects, we used two versions of UiPath: the enterprise and cloud versions. The orchestrator that comes with the enterprise version is different from the cloud version. The cloud version had better end-to-end automation, and the ease of use and accessibility were superior to those of the enterprise orchestrator, which is the on-premise version of UiPath. Although the enterprise version lacks a few features, the cloud version provides a complete solution.

I was impressed by UiPath's user community. We used an open-source library that someone else had built and generously shared with the UiPath community. It ideally suited our needs. The user community is also very responsive, and we readily receive answers to our questions.

We didn't see immediate benefits from UiPath because it was a new tool I was piloting. We had to prove to upper management that it saved significant time, and we eventually eliminated manual testing. It took until the project's end to demonstrate this, as management focuses on results, not processes. However, other teams adopted UiPath after completion, so benefits appeared after two or three months. It took time to get people on board, but they eventually embraced the idea.

UiPath has significantly improved our efficiency by automating domain and application monitoring, saving valuable time and working hours. These tasks were previously quite intensive and repetitive, demanding considerable focus and effort from our employees. With UiPath handling these processes, we've freed up our workforce to take on more engaging and strategic responsibilities.

My favorite aspect of UiPath is its user-friendly interface, as it's a no-code, low-code platform that eliminates the need for extensive coding. Its drag-and-drop functionality, coupled with UiPath's comprehensive library suite, simplifies automation tasks. For instance, the Microsoft Outlook and SharePoint libraries allow seamless integration with those platforms, streamlining processes like connecting to SharePoint in Microsoft 365. In essence, the combination of UiPath's robust infrastructure and versatile tools significantly enhances its usability and effectiveness.

I found the UiPath Academy courses to be a bit rigid in their curriculum. It was more beneficial for me to learn from the forums and YouTube videos. Their courses were tailored to particular roles, with a course on UiPath in data science being heavily focused on Excel. While it was a well-structured course, it didn't align with my job's limited use of Excel. Overall, their courses are well-built, but I found YouTube a more suitable learning platform for my needs.

UiPath Studio provides comprehensive tools and libraries for building automation, but it lacks a built-in feature to generate consolidated reports after automation runs, detailing successes, failures, and operational features. This absence of detailed logging information makes it difficult to troubleshoot issues and identify whether the problem lies within the application or the automation itself. While UiPath's orchestrator website provides some information, it's insufficient for demonstrating automation runs and accomplished features to stakeholders. Although a future release may address this, the lack of robust reporting capabilities remains a significant area for improvement. Additionally, UiPath's diverse suite of licenses can confuse end-users, making it challenging to determine the most suitable option. While the company has improved features, the increased number of licenses creates a knowledge gap between what's available and user understanding. Clearer explanations of each license would simplify decision-making for potential users and streamline adoption.

I have been using UiPath for one year.

Once we have the licensed version of UiPath, we don't anticipate issues with caching. We were using the 2021 Studio version because it was stable. Although the UiPath team suggested upgrading, I'm not certain about the reasons. I can't comment on the latest models, but the 2021 version was reliable.

The scalability of UiPath depends on the number of licenses. To deploy our automation, we need to utilize robots responsible for executing the automation we've built in a user-less environment. Scalability is directly proportional to the number of robots we have, which is, in turn, determined by the number of licenses. Therefore, more licenses translate to greater scalability.

The initial onboarding of UiPath was straightforward, but the only challenge we encountered was connecting UiPath Studio to the Orchestrator. UiPath Studio is where automations are built, while the Orchestrator is where they are deployed and run. This required some back-and-forth with the product team and my technical lead. However, this issue only arises during the initial setup. Once someone familiar with the process sets it up, it becomes easier. There were some challenges connecting and deploying the first automation, specifically between the Orchestrator and Studio.

Three people were involved in the deployment: my technical lead, who liaised with the product team to discuss progress and challenges; myself, responsible for building and deploying the automation; and one of my junior colleagues, who assisted me. In short, we had a three-person team.

We used UiPath and built and deployed that project, which ran successfully for approximately two quarters while I was away. However, the cost and licensing associated with UiPath became an issue. The license we were using offered excellent features specific to our needs, but it didn't provide much beyond that. It didn't make sense to continue spending much money on UiPath, even though it saved us time and money. The savings were essentially being reinvested back into purchasing the UiPath license. While UiPath licenses offer valuable features, they are expensive. For our single-use case, investing that much wasn't justifiable. We switched to Selenium, an open-source automation tool. Although it took additional time to deploy the same solution with Selenium, and it might not be a 100 percent match in functionality, it allowed us to save on costs.

The cost of UiPath is justified for organizations with many use cases but not for one or two use cases.

I give UiPath a seven out of ten.

The advice I'd like to give new UiPath users is to first understand their specific use case for UiPath. I've noticed some teams try to adopt UiPath by first figuring out a solution and then trying to retrofit it to their existing problems. Instead, I suggest thoroughly understanding the problem before creating a solution. Many teams see others using UiPath and assume it's a cool new tool they can simply apply to their existing issues. This approach rarely leads to optimal results. You might be able to build a solution, but it won't be the most efficient. For first-time users, I recommend understanding your problem, then exploring UiPath's capabilities to determine the best solution. There are plenty of resources available, like forums and YouTube, to help with the building process. Remember, understand the problem first, then build the solution.

The primary use case for document processing, automating data extraction from previously hard-to-access documents. This saves time, reduces manual work, and makes hidden data more accessible and usable.

It allows us to extract valuable information from various documents, categorize them based on their types, and make the data within these documents usable for our needs.

Assessing an AI center's role in orchestrating various elements of AI capabilities is quite constrained.

I have been working with UiPath for three years.

I find it to be highly stable.

Scaling on-premises can be cost-prohibitive due to the need to invest in hardware and infrastructure. This cost factor makes transitioning to the cloud a more attractive and well-designed option for scalability.

Our experience with their customer support has been excellent. We've encountered very few issues that required us to reach out, but when we did, we could contact our dedicated representative, and they efficiently escalated the matter, resulting in a prompt response from their support team. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

We have experience with Microsoft Power Automate, but it's important to note that UiPath and Microsoft Power Automate serve different purposes and have distinct target use cases. This uniqueness is a critical factor that sets them apart from each other.

The initial setup process was quite straightforward.

We initiated the POC to test the viability and implementation of automation before expanding the environment. The setup was designed with the understanding that we required distinct test and production environments. It was initially developed as an on-premises solution and is now transitioning to a cloud deployment. We've had a lot of success with Lydonia Technologies as a partner.

We now have access to critical data, and the accuracy has improved significantly. Additionally, the time it takes for processes or submissions to go through has been reduced from three or four days to just one day. While the cost savings in terms of dollar values may not be substantial, the real benefit lies in freeing up employees to concentrate on more meaningful tasks.

I find the pricing to be reasonable, especially when compared to other offerings in the same market.

My advice would be to begin with a small-scale approach and construct your automation incrementally. While it might be tempting to automate an entire process in one go, it's more practical to break it down into smaller components. This way, you can adapt and refine each piece as you go, reducing the risk of issues arising or changes occurring before the entire automation is completed. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate various processes across different functions within our organization including back-office operations, with a particular emphasis on finance, procurement, HR, and IT, as RPA technologies initially emerged from the finance sector.

Also, we extend our automation services to areas directly associated with production and supply chain operations.

Our primary goal is process automation, which lowers costs, enhances quality and improves operational flexibility. This is crucial due to our multi-time zone operations, requiring continuous processing. We're also dedicated to integrating various applications within the organization and addressing gaps. While engineering and IT departments have substantial automation, we're working on refining and addressing specific gaps in these areas.

The orchestration process itself offers a high level of impact, flexibility, and ease of development. While we have made significant improvements, particularly in terms of integrations and the seamless connection of integrators to applications, the process remains remarkably straightforward and efficient. It has significantly improved the accuracy of our operations, particularly in terms of quality, and has also reduced the time required.

There's room for enhancement, particularly in the support department and in the area of reporting, to provide a more robust product for gathering insights.

I have been working with UiPath for approximately five years.

The solution's stability is quite commendable and even when we encounter incidents, we consistently update to the latest versions. We typically lag about seven months behind the latest releases because it takes around three to four months for the new versions to stabilize after their initial release. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Scalability appears to be quite robust, especially when we have a solid model in place.

The improvement is needed for their support services. I would rate it seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup was relatively straightforward. Back then, we were using a standalone automation suite. While we now have a cloud-based automation suite, the transition wasn't complex, and we found it quite easy to implement.

We've seen a positive ROI. Our organization, with the assistance of skilled consultants, successfully implemented the system and we established a robust business model and have maintained a centralized approach.

We evaluated several solutions available at the time, all of which were related to end automation. Ultimately, we opted for UiPath and that decision was influenced by the learning opportunities offered through UiPath Academy. At the time, it appeared to have the most compelling value proposition, with a strong ability to market and demonstrate the product effectively compared to other options.

The ease of use depends on whether you're a developer or someone who mainly uses automation. Nowadays, it is much more user-friendly compared to when I first started using it back in the day. The landscape has evolved significantly with a wider range of solutions available today and they've made substantial improvements, especially in terms of document standards.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use UiPath in all business areas like finance, HR, accounts payable, production,  etc. 

UiPath's entire package is valuable. It is a user-friendly solution. 

UiPath needs to incorporate French and Portuguese language-based training. It is not easy for people without an IT background. 

I have been using the product for four years. 

UiPath is stable. 

We have rolled out about 20 citizen development programs. We aim to reach 100 by the year's end. We use it all over the world. It is scalable. 

We chose UiPath because it is easy to expand the benefits program. 

The tool's deployment is time-consuming. 

UiPath is expensive. 

We implemented UiPath to increase quality and take away repetitive tasks from employees so that they could focus more. It helped us to cut down on time. 

The tool has helped us save a few minutes of employees' time. 

I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use UiPath for document manipulation. It helps us split PDF files, clean and submit them to the government website. 

The tool's most valuable feature is the ability to pull information and manipulate documents. 

UiPath should improve its support team. 

I have been working with the product for six to eight months. 

I haven't had any issues with stability yet. 

UiPath is scalable. 

UiPath's deployment was complex because we weren't familiar with it. 

A partner helped us with the tool's implementation. They did the development work while we focused on back-end activities like getting the servers up. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. The legal department saves time and money with its use. 

I wasn't surprised by the tool's pricing. It was comparable to my expectations. 

The business objective we tried to achieve with UiPath was the PDF turnaround times. We needed to meet the deadline for the filings. If we missed the deadline, we couldn't submit them. Hence, the timing of submitting the filings was critical.  

I work for a law firm where timing is critical. AI-powered automation has helped our organization unload people from repetitive tasks and instead focus on client and legal work. 

UiPath has freed our resources' time. Earlier, eight to ten people needed to work eight hours to complete the filing. We can do it in under an hour without ten people focusing on the task. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten. You need to take advantage of the solution's training to help you understand its capabilities. I was new to the product and was surprised by its capabilities. It is a huge benefit to access the training without paying for it. 

I've used the solution within the healthcare system in the past. At this time, I use it for mortgages. 

I use the solution to automate any digital processes that have specific rules and steps to follow and can potentially save the company a lot of time and money.

The Studio is extremely user-friendly.  All of their products are user-friendly. I use the Orchestrator a lot as it's so simple. 

My assessment of the ease of building automation using the product is positive. The UI of the application itself is very easy to use and navigate. It's very easy to debug. The fact that they're constantly listening to the feedback from the customers and the developers in the developer community is great. They're constantly pushing updates to fix things or add new features based on that feedback. They are really a company that listens to their users.

I have done automations for good causes. It was for responsibly disposing of medications. I didn't stick around to see the positive impact. I implemented it and then left. This was for a Fortune Top-Four company. There were a lot of people who ultimately received the notifications that came out thanks to this robot that let them know how to dispose of medications and the requirements. It also went as far as to locate the two nearest facilities based on their physical address within the closest driving distance. Hopefully, it caused a lot of people to be able to easily know where they could take those medications to dispose of them.

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It's extremely important. If you're going to automate something, you need to go all in. It's not necessarily black and white. There are exceptions to that rule. However, if it can be automated and it makes sense to automate it, then it should be automated. There shouldn't be human intervention if it's not absolutely necessary. Otherwise, it defeats the purpose of automating.

The user community is great. I see several people who are very trustworthy in their responses. It's very, very active. Everybody's helping each other out as far as giving them solutions to their issues, so it's something that I turned to quite a bit. 

We've seen large time and money savings. As you start doing more and more processes, other people talk to other people, and then you get other people coming to you saying they have processes that should be automated. It's simply a matter of knocking down those walls and getting people to understand that we have this tool at our fingertips. And once they understand that then the opportunities are limitless.

I've seen some minimization in the on-premises footprint thanks to UiPath. In some companies that I've worked at, yes. In others, no. Where I'm at right now, they're still on-prem there, however, they are planning to go to the cloud next year.

Whether it is essential or not for customers to go to the cloud to reduce this on-premise footprint depends on the customer. Some customers, especially in the healthcare space, are afraid of the cloud for security reasons even though there is a lot of documentation to prove otherwise that it is very secure. The healthcare industry is always behind when it comes to that stuff. It takes a lot of building up of trust. The same is true with the government. However, there are others that embrace leading-edge technologies, and those are the ones that are using the cloud.

I've used the Academy courses. I was able to get my advanced RPA developer certification. It allows me to stay current on all of the updates that are being done across all of the products. It's very easy to filter and find the course that you want to watch depending on the product or your level of expertise. The actual format of the courses is very well done. The person who speaks is very clearly spoken, and easily understood. They do a combination of reading, videos, and hands-on in all the courses. It is a little bit for every type of learning style, and I've gotten a lot out of it.

I do not use the solution's AI functionality in our automation program much. I have used document understanding, which is one of their AI products. It opens up a whole new world of possibilities. There's already so much that can be done very easily and there is nothing that's too difficult to implement. Once you do understand how to build processes that use AI, it opens up many other possibilities that could get even bigger in terms of the value that it brings to a company. I gained a lot of knowledge and new skills from going through the process of building out a document understanding process and understanding how to learn all those new tools. It also integrates with the action center and a couple of the other UI top products as well. It's a really good learning experience. 

It has enabled me to automate more processes. It can contribute to the end-to-end automation that we implement. It just depends on where the company is at and their automation journey if they have processes that would be very high returns in terms of value and require more AI integration.

The product can help speed up digital transformation and reduce the cost of the digital transformation. Having these tools in your toolbox allows you to do a lot more so long as you have the digital input.

We no longer require any expense, complex application upgrades, or IT application support. It's very easy, especially with the cloud. I did have some difficulties recently at a company that goes through a proxy on their VMs, which made it a little bit more difficult to install the machines and get them working. However, overall, when you have to install what is needed to build and run the automation and you're on the cloud version, it's simply an executable that you download. You click through a couple of screens that are very self-explanatory and well-explained. And that's it. There's nothing special to do as everything else is hosted in the cloud. As long as you have the wherewithal to set up a VM with the basic requirements that are needed, it's extremely easy.

I've seen a reduction in human errors while using UiPath. A robot is programmed to do what you tell it to do. It's not going to make the same type of mistakes that a human would make. It would make mistakes only due to the way that you program it. Therefore, it absolutely should and does reduce the errors that you would see otherwise from a human.

The solution has freed up employee time. The most recent report that I got from some automation that has been done in the past shows that, over the past five or six months of automation, that I have built there have been two full-time employees at 60 hours a week who were let go, and then there were at least two other people that were are now spending at least half their time doing manual inputs. Now, they are doing other things. There's a direct impact that I've seen just from recent automation.

The money saved from manual labor is a clear cost savings. Other times, it's more about cost avoidance. Sometimes there is some additional value that it brings that's almost unable to be calculated - such as customer satisfaction, customer retention, or customer acquisition. Those things are a little bit harder to calculate. For the most part, it offers a clear time equals-money type of cost-benefit.

Unfortunately, I used to be a lover of their Slack channel and people don't seem so responsive there anymore. Unfortunately, I've gotten away from using their Slack channel. That would have been a really good way for me to get some help from the community, yet I don't find it helpful anymore.

They're working on integrating their version of a chat. They're starting with Studio Xpress or StudioWeb. I don't use StudioWeb and I don't use StudioX, however, I would love to have that type of feature in Studio. I could use it across the board, not just in Studio, but in Assist. 

Their error messaging could use some improvement. More times than not an error that you receive is accurate or not clear.

In terms of missing features, I can't think of any. They are always ten steps ahead.

I've used the solution since 2018.

The solution is stable and reliable. 

The solution is 100% scalable. 

It's very easy to open an issue with support. I've learned over the years that you don't need to necessarily say that you have a high-priority issue in order to get a quick response. They are very responsive. They are very clear in the steps they need you to take to give you what they need in order to fix your problem. If they're unable to fix it by requesting that information. They get on a call with you to troubleshoot. They follow up with you after. They give you a survey to make sure they did well. Every part of their support process is great. I have no complaints at all.

Positive

I have only scratched the surface of RPA. With Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, I've only worked with them enough to see where they are in comparison to UiPath. I also fully trust the reports that Gartner puts out, and UiPath has been on top for so long now and always is and always keeps that spot. I don't want to waste my time on anything else. I want to stay in this lane with a product and a company that I know and love - one that has done an amazing job - and be an expert in that rather than go around and only know a little bit about a lot of things.

It's very easy to implement the solution and I've done it multiple times. I'm not somebody who typically installs software. I'm not a hardware person. I'm not even good with other types of software necessarily, and yet I find the installation process to be very simple.

I didn't need a lot of staff to handle the deployment process. There are companies that I've been at that have to follow certain protocols for auditing purposes and have to have somebody that's designated DevOps in order to do the deployment. In which case, it requires a little bit more hand-holding or documentation to explain how to do that to somebody who's not in the position like I am who knows how to do it, and you have to explain it to them. I don't think that it's needed or necessary, and it actually hinders the process, especially when we deploy something to production. It doesn't work quite the same in production as it just did in development, and you need to make changes, and it really hinders that process when you have another set of hands to go through.

Maintenance has the potential to be a little bit difficult. That said, I've done big upgrades twice now. For the most part, things have been backward compatible. I haven't had an issue. I didn't need to go back and fix any previous processes that were deployed. I just started using the newer versions of things on new processes going forward and the old ones still ran with no issue whatsoever, it very clearly states things that have been deprecated or things that will be deprecated by a certain date. 

With the cloud version, there is not much maintenance required. However, they did just do an upgrade on the cloud. I was not aware that it was coming, and it would have been nice to at least see something on the site to catch your eye, some type of scrolling banner or flashing to tell you, "Hey, this is updated. Click this link to see what the updates are." In the cloud, if you're not using the automation suite, it will just update without you knowing about it, which I'm not a fan of. I understand that's how that works. If you don't have an automation suite, however, I would like to know. Don't make me go search for it. I'm on Orchestrator every day. I'd prefer if they put something there, or put something in Studio so that I know it's coming since the changes did affect us. They had some role and permission changes that affected my developers, and they weren't able to publish anymore, and I had to figure that out. Ultimately, you do have to make sure that you're staying up to date with your studio and assistant.

The pricing is very fair. They have adjusted their pricing model so that several variables and volume base could be one of them. I'm not too sure. A lot of times I'm cut out from those conversations. The company itself has to sign off on contracts or make the decision on that. That said, it's my understanding the pricing is very fair for what they give you. You see your benefit and the return from it quickly.

I'm a developer and an architect. 

The ease of usability and implementation for UiPath as well as the wide array of products that they have to support their automation journey make it a great product. The amazing support they have is great. The community that they have is bigger than all the other options, so you're going to find more resources when it comes to needing help with any type of issue. I'd advise those considering the product to look at the ratings and pertinent reports to get an overview of who's the best.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use UiPath for replicating manual tasks and PDF automation. 

UiPath saves us a significant amount of time and is recognized as the leader in Robotic Process Automation. It helps us a lot. It makes us much more efficient at dealing with repetitive tasks, reduces costs, and makes automating processes easier compared to other automation solutions.

The solution reduces human error; automating manual cases lowers the risk of error by over 90%, including recurrent mistakes. This keeps our clients happy.  

The product frees up a significant amount of employee time by automating manual tasks and being so user-friendly and time-efficient, meaning we don't have to spend much time using the app. 

I like how easy it is to automate tasks and how time-efficient the product is.

UiPath is very user-friendly, so even employees with no coding experience can use it, which adds value to staff with less experience in coding.

Building automation using UiPath is easy; creating scripts for automated test apps and PDFs isn't difficult.  

The solution enables us to build end-to-end automation, which is important to us, and it's one of the only automation apps that can provide this.   

We use the platform's AI functionality in our automation program, which has significantly contributed to our end-to-end automation. It's cost and time-efficient, and that's what we want from an automation app.   

UiPath speeds up and reduces the cost of digital transformation without requiring expensive or complex application upgrades or IT support. It provides features in a cost-efficient way.  

The interactive selection could be more accurate.

The customer support could be faster. 

We've been using the solution for between three and six months. 

UiPath is a stable app; I give it nine out of ten for stability.

The solution is scalable; I can't see any ways in which there would be a problem or limitation with scalability.

We contacted technical support, and they have solved most of our issues lately. Sometimes we don't get the solution we want and are dissatisfied, but overall, I rate them very highly.

Positive

UiPath is the only automation solution I have used. 

I wasn't involved in the solution's deployment, and apart from keeping the version up to date, it doesn't require any maintenance. 

The solution saves costs for our organization, though I'm not aware of precisely how much.

We didn't evaluate any other options, the company provided UiPath, and we didn't have a choice in the matter. It's an excellent product, and we don't have any problems with it. No solution is perfect, but that's to be expected.

I rate the solution 10 out of 10.

We use UiPath to automate processes that deal with a ''good cause'' we are involved in; specifically, we use it for employee diversity.  

The product's automation helps a lot in achieving the results regarding our ''good cause''; we encounter fewer errors compared to other automation apps.

Being a part of the UiPath user community is valuable.  

I recommend the solution and have recommended it to many of my friends who work in the same domain. 

We have yet to use any UiPath Academy courses, but we plan to in the future.

We used this solution to automate monitoring, implement robots, and monitor the robots. We use it for network monitoring, ticketing systems, and remediation activities. This is a SaaS solution. 

This solution is mostly used by network engineers in managed services. The engineers look after telecom networks, and they are the end users. For automation, a sizable team of developers, specialized automation developers, and solution architects used the solution. There were about 40 RPA developers and 10 solution architects.

We plan to automate some of the business processes regarding financial reporting.

We used this solution in the automation of a legacy Jira application that was used for CR management. We use the change request template, and we're able to collect data from various systems through APIs and submitting requests.

Since we started using this solution, our team has had more time to work on other tasks.

The solution has reduced human error by processing the data directly from the source and into the destination application without human intervention.

Our internal clients are glad that KPIs are increasing.

A lot of my colleagues have used the UiPath Academy course. There were also colleagues who used the course and weren't involved in the day-to-day automation process.

It really helps employees be aware of how the tool works, how they can better describe processes, and with what level of detail they need us to describe processes so we can automate their work.

One of the biggest improvements was that some of our colleagues who weren't technical and weren't working in the automation domain started to build their own robots to automate some parts of their work without help from our automation team.

UiPath's community is used by quite a lot of our developers to solve some issues and get resolutions faster. The community is quite big compared to other communities. We get more resources, and it's more active than other communities.

We use Attended Automation for some of the monitoring, like creating outlets based on network events. Attended Automation helped scale RPA benefits in our organization by automating department or role-specific processes that require human-robot collaboration. 

With the involvement of a lot of colleagues from different departments, mostly using Attended Automation, we have increased the awareness of automation and robot automation in the company.

I like the interface. It's simple to interact with. We can replicate and multiply the robots when we need to change something.

It's easy to build automations using UiPath. Colleagues who aren't very technical can develop their own automations.

The developer studio could be improved. There have been glitches, but it improved from year to year.

I have used this solution for three years.

We had some issues with stability because of some unattended robots. During execution, there were stability issues.

We didn't have many issues with scalability.

We have a good relationship with UiPath. We are in Romania, and they have an office here.

I would rate support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The setup was easy. Within one month, we migrated from Blue Prism to UiPath and started implementing some robots.

We had a small POC to discover how it would fit in our infrastructure and how feasible it would be to have all the functionality from our previous tools. We rolled it out for a small department and migrated all automation to UiPath. Then, we gradually rolled it out to other areas.

Overall, the solution saved costs. Last year, it saved us between 8% and 12% of costs.

We increased the speed of delivery of automation, so it's a good return on investment.

We also evaluated Blue Prism. Due to its subscription pattern, it wasn't flexible enough for everybody to understand it and work with the tools. Licensing was a bottleneck.

Blue Prism didn't reduce the cost of automation, but it increased the number of automations we did in the same period by 30%.

I would rate this solution seven out of ten. 

My advice is that depending on the business domain where you want to implement the solution, it's more feasible for document processing and ingesting data in applications, not for executing commands in various application servers or infrastructure. 

Stability is an issue. In large deployments where you have a lot of robots, these issues can cause a lot of intermittent problems with the operation of the robots.