UiPath Reviews

We have multiple use cases for this solution. We have applications built on Microsoft platforms and we use UiPath for our automation and automation testing. Being able to do this means that we do not need to keep reverting back to test every use case when we complete upgrades. 

We also use this solution for the automation of responses to support tickets. Any tickets that come through that can be automated, rather than it being done manually. 

UiPath has improved the ease of building automations. We were using SeleniumBase testing which is a legacy application and required a lot of manual work to maintain it. 

UiPath has made a significant difference on our staff's workload capacity and freed up team members to take on new endeavors versus getting stuck with manual tasks. 

This solution has been most valuable for our support ticketing processes. This has created efficiencies within our team and freed up time for them to focus on project work. It has prevented the need for them to stop what they are doing to complete a mundane task and then get back to what they were doing. 

We previously built automation repositories before it was offered by UiPath. There's no smooth migration from what we built to the newer studio that they have at the moment. This is the biggest hurdle we are facing. We would also need to rebuild all previous automations built in another solution called SeleniumBase.

I have been using this solution for one and a half years. 

We experienced some performance issues because our libraries are growing and we experience crashes from time to time. This usually means we need to reboot. The stability could be improved in this regard. The ability to handle large-scale applications or multiple applications could be improved as our operations and libraries are going to continue to grow. Currently, our libraries need to be split and this creates more maintenance for us. 

We are satisfied with the scalability. We are aware of new features coming in the future and we will be able to adapt and expand our applications based on these new features. 

The technical support for this solution could be improved. They take longer to respond than I would expect. We would like a 24 to 48-hour SLA in place to manage expectations. 

I would rate their support a six out of ten. This is not due to their ability to resolve an issue. It is due to their lack of transparency and keeping us updated on how issues are being resolved. They are not good at communicating when we can expect our issue to be resolved. 

Neutral

We used SeleniumBase. We needed a solution with enhanced technical capabilities and this is why we switched to UiPath. UiPath offered us a lot in terms of functionality. 

I was a part of the implementation team in our organization where I made sure there were no roadblocks. I was working with UiPath's points of contact and they were coordinating and making sure the implementation happened as planned.

The initial setup was complex. It happened three years ago and we still have some questions about the setup. In order to get answers to these questions, we need to raise a support ticket. I feel like the knowledge of the support individuals could be elevated so we could receive answers right away. 

We implemented this solution in-house. 

We have not yet experienced ROI using this solution as we have only been using it for a year and a half. We don't have control over the domain to see the metrics and KPIs at the moment. We are hoping that once some of our core applications are in operation, we will be able to assess the ROI. 

UiPath has reduced our manual effort and improved the overall efficiency of our team. 

We considered Microsoft's Power Platform which does offer very similar functionality to UiPath including a Desktop AI Builder. However, this solution had limitations that UiPath does not. UiPath is focused on automation and offers a lot of support in this regard whereas Microsoft focuses on so many different areas. 

I would advise others to hang in there for the first six to eight months as the initial learning curve can be frustrating. Once you get a hang of it, you will clearly see the benefit of using this solution. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. Our test automations need to be improved for migration purposes and overall performance could be improved. If those two were resolved, I would give it a ten out of ten. 

We work with TMS, a technology-management resolution division. We use UiPath to read the PDF documents that we get. We manage a business service for TMS and as part of that business contract, we read the PDFs and enter that information. We get that information out via documents from the templates where we have to enter information related to that particular case. 

These are the use cases that we are currently working on, but we are also looking to use this for quality assurance of all the steps because this is a highly visible, very critical process for TMS. We have to make sure that everything is done on time and that all of the information is relevant and responsive. Quality assurance is a big deal for us, and we are looking to use UiPath quality checks at different stages in the process.

We are in the initial stages, so I can't really say that we have achieved a whole lot of efficiencies using UiPath yet. We hope to achieve a whole lot of efficiency when it comes to the documents. Right now it takes about 45 minutes to do this process manually, to read that entire form. It is going to be reduced to two minutes. That is a huge efficiency gain, and that is the value that it will add.

When it comes to the ease of building automations, UiPath offers many libraries for developers to use. It's fairly easy to code it. 

We definitely expect that it will save us costs and human error. There is a lot of critical information in these forms and there is a human error because we process huge volumes. Obviously, when a robot is doing it, that human error will be reduced to a minimum.

The hope is that employees will be able to allocate their time to different work.

We use the Academy. We are enrolled in the partner program, and we have used a lot of courses from the Academy. It keeps us up to date and up to speed with the solution. Although, our needs right now are very focused and limited because we are just starting. I'm sure as we grow and as we advance in our RPA journey, there will be enough documentation and courses for our needs. 

Most of our PDFs are scanned PDFs and the OCR does not always capture all the information correctly. That's why the document understanding feature will be good for us. 

We have been using UiPath for about four months now. 

We haven't seen any issues with stability. It's definitely been good.

We have used technical support when I had some issues installing the system. 

I am looking for ways to get the technical support we need faster. 

I think that the pricing for the basic attended robot Studio is great. I think that all of the new features that they are rolling out if they are reasonably priced, they'll be useful because for people like the ones working on our projects who are funded by the government, they have a cap on how much they can spend.

Keeping the price in a reasonable range would be beneficial, and it'll be more usable and more in reach for people.

We considered Blue Prism, but through our research, we chose UiPath because of what they've already achieved with CMS. We thought it would be the best solution. 

The UiPath website has a lot of information and the Academy offers a lot of courses. I heard from different people in different industries and markets that this is the best solution. It's worth a try. There is more work in the beginning when you are getting it set up. But there are a lot of benefits, and you don't have to wait months and months to see them. You can start seeing the benefits early on.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

We're mainly focused on finance for the time being so we've used UiPath for invoice processing and e-billing reconciliation. It makes sure that all of our converting information matches within our client databases. We've done a couple of solutions that track budget spend for certain clients, making sure that if the budget overruns or comes close to overrunning, then someone gets notified. If we get a new client or if a new legal case is opened, automation can make sure that all that information is then uploaded into our database. 

We've done a couple of smaller automations for the legal teams. These have been fairly basic ones though. There were a couple that download files from an email for them, and then rename them with the correct naming conventions, and saves them into correct drives. 

Another use case is to remove outdated users or information from our databases in line with the GDPR system.

In a general sense, UiPath has helped with data lineage, understanding where a process starts, who it rests with, and where it ends. It has made the process that we have automated a little bit more clear of which parts of the process are necessary, which are the parts that hold up the whole process, and which are the ones that are needlessly complicated.

For starters, it just helps give a bit more of an understanding of our processes once they're automated. Secondly, it's changed the way that we approach problems. We're tied into contracts that we might necessarily not want to be, but because we rely on the solution, we don't have a choice. Whereas, because UiPath is so versatile, we can use that to fill in gaps to take over processes, which otherwise in the past, we thought that only one specific tool could do for us. Now, we feel like we'd be less reliant on these specific tools to do a specific job. 

Third, a lot of teams are starting to understand that things can be automated. Whether it's in finance, HR, or even the legal teams, we started speaking to all the different teams and now they're bringing work to us and they're getting an understanding of things that do need to be done by a person and which don't. People aren't just doing work for the sake of it now. If they think there isn't a point to something and it can be automated, they bring it to us and we automate it. So, it's changed the way that we look at processes and don't just hardheadedly get someone to do it for no reason.

It checks our invoice stage for one of the processes that we do for e-billing. Previously, there wasn't anyone to check the financial data that we have in our systems against our clients and our recipients, and making sure that it all matches up. That process wasn't done at all so a month or two months later, a client would come back to us and say, "Hang on, you billed a strong amount or you've put our billing address wrong" which is obviously a little embarrassing. These things went completely unobserved for months. The client had to chase us, complain, and tell us we needed to fix it. Whereas now, it's more of a proactive approach rather than waiting for clients to come to us and tell us that we've done something wrong. We actually have the automation that can check and then validate those mistakes before they're even a problem and before they're spotted by anyone.

We're still in the early stages but we are starting to reach the point where UiPath is speeding up the cost of our digital transformation.

The digital transformation has made a couple of the lawyers' jobs easier by getting rid of the admin staff. It's freed up time and it makes things easier for everyone.

UiPath has definitely reduced our processing times as well. It really depends on the process but it has sped up. 

It has also decreased our error rates. At the moment we're looking to purchase an orchestration platform. At that point, we'll be able to collect more information about exact numbers and we'll actually have the analytics. 

The ability to use APIs within UiPath is really helpful. The web scraping is really great. It's so easy to use, it's very intuitive, and it's usually pretty consistent. When web pages change you need to update it, but it makes it quick. If you need to do another quick process, it's really easy to get it quickly and set something up. I can just scrape data from a website and save it somewhere.

The ease of building automation depends. UiPath makes things that are fairly simple but looks a little bit tricky in another language really easy. But if you're trying to do something really complicated, then sometimes it can be a little bit more tricky. It depends, sometimes it's really simple for fairly basic automations, I think it's fantastic. But when you want to try and get into the nitty-gritty and try and write your own code and then stick in there, it can sometimes be a bit difficult to use.

The documentation can be a little bit lacking. I think they improved it a little bit last month. Last time I checked, it seemed like they spent a bit of time trying to improve it. Sometimes some of the processes are nicely documented. UiPath offers training, which they provide on their website. They teach you how to use it, but for some processes, it just seems like the documentation isn't really there. It makes it a little bit difficult when you're using a specific process from the first time. 

If you're trying to invoke a method in UiPath, if you're trying to write a C# in there directly,  or if you need to do something which can't really be done in UiPath, but it can be done in C# or Python or something else, sometimes it's not that intuitive. It can be a little bit more complicated than it needs to be. I think that integration with other languages could be a little bit better.

We have been using UiPath permanently for around eight months, but we've been using it in-house for about a year before that.

UiPath itself is very stable because it interacts with so many different applications. I noticed in the past, at times, when using it with browsers, for example, using it with Google Chrome or Firefox, occasionally Chrome or Firefox will update and UiPath can take sometimes a week or two to update with it. For that week, you're able to use any solution that involves Google Chrome or Firefox, because it's waiting for that update. I've seen that happen with a couple of different applications, not as much recently. UiPath itself is very stable because it can interact with anything. If anything is updated and UiPath doesn't have time to update drivers to match that, sometimes you can get left a little bit stuck.

It's not really easy when you're using orchestrator to scale up and create a server, add a new bot, get a new license, and get it running. 

At the moment, it's just me using UiPath. I'm a developer and the architect for the solution as well. But we're planning to expand the team next year. 

We have a couple of processes that are running constantly, so I think we're using it as much as we can, and as much as our licenses allow. We're at a point now where we need an orchestrator to keep track and run everything at the same time. We're in the process now of purchasing that. I'll see where we're moving to, to expand quite far beyond that after we've got it. We're just at the point of ramping up.

I've sent a couple of requests to support when we needed licenses and when we changed to a different computer or a different user, and they got back to us really quickly and solved it within a day or so. I've been pretty happy with UiPath so far. I think every time I've sent a request to them, it's been resolved pretty quickly, and even if they couldn't resolve it super quick, the response times are usually within 24 hours or so, which is really good. I can't remember a time where we've been stuck in the dark with them.

I've used Automation Anywhere, but I haven't really used it within my work.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I implemented UiPath for a couple of years before I came to my current company. It was quite easy, but even the first time it's always been quite easy and quite simple to implement.

The initial setup only took a couple of days to get it all installed properly and cleared with IT. In terms of getting the first process up and running, it took about a week or two because we already had a couple of processes that were available. That's just a case of tweaking them, making sure they're all okay, and then just getting them set up and getting more packaged up.

Our initial strategy was mainly to focus on finance and to try and reduce the outsourced headcount with a couple of the finance teams. We outsource a lot of our work to a couple of other companies and we want to reduce the cost of that, so I automate it in-house. Our other strategy was to try and free up as much time for our lawyers as possible to make sure they weren't bogged down with work. It gives them more time to focus on the clients and work up better relationships with them.

We're still looking at the process that we've automated and seeing how much time and money we're saving with this crisis, but we don't have that information at the moment.

The pricing is pretty fair. Sometimes the pricing can be a little bit strange. There are different prices if it's for a specific user, a specific PC or if it's an attended bot or unattended bot. The price can be quite different, but I think when you talk to UiPath or when you look at the pricing sheets, there's not always a justification of why a certain license is more expensive than another. 

Licenses are more expensive than another but I wonder why there's such a big difference, why attended is four times more expensive, and that sort of thing. In terms of the orchestrator, I think it was a bit too much. It used to cost about 20,000 pounds a year. Now, they are ramping up costs. If you get an orchestrator but with just a few blocks, it's cheaper and then you can add up more parts to the orchestrator. So the cost goes up, which I think is better.

Definitely to try and get as many teams involved as possible to open up the conversation about RPA within the business. It works best when you've got lots of teams who have an understanding of RPA and how it works. They can come to you with their potential projects and you can filter through them and see which ones are going to be the most helpful.

It's hard if no one else in the business really knows RPA or how it works, or if there's a bit of a wall there. It's important to introduce RPA to as many different teams as possible and to encourage people to get involved, think about the processes that they do in it, and try to identify what can be helpful.

It's important to keep RPA close to the applications and the IT teams because if you're using RPA or UiPath you're going to need to be able to be speaking to your team who need permissions or admin privileges, or you need apps to be updated. It's important if you're going to put it in, have it as close to apps and development as possible.

It's a case of understanding that it's not a case of trying to get everything automated that you possibly can. The goal shouldn't just be to automate everything. If you've got a process and you can do 99% of it automated but you can't automate the last 1%, you can but it's going to be really fairly inefficient. Understand that it's fine for a process to have some bits that are automated, some of which are done by a person. The hybrid workforce, rather than going into the strategy of just automating everything is ideal. I've learned that trying to find that balance and getting that communication between the two is good.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

I work in finance functions, so typically implementing it within our finance accounting hub that we have out in Manila when most of our processes are stabilized and globalized experts. So, it's a very good fit to have our processes automated out in Manila.

We are in the early stages of implementing our robots, but at this stage, you already see things like our customer satisfaction, so we're supporting your finest teams, so they are already getting benefiting it, and very much tedious tasks that sitting with the team, they're actually find they don't need to do the tedious tasks. 

Funny enough, that out in the Philippines, they are actually welcoming robotics because it creates capacity for them in order to bring more work into our accounting hub, so that would be where I can see a real benefit in our organization already. 

I think we very much focus on traditional development opportunities, so API to API connectivity and those type of things are very much the way that we're doing things. We have development teams out around the world that develop, and I specifically work with financial functions and develop our finance systems, typically more of a traditional development focus rather than using robotics opportunities, but we are starting to see robotics becoming a bit more prominent. People are more interested in it, and people are starting to engage a bit more with the robotic side of things. I think the benefit of using robots is actually becoming a bit more visible within the organization.

We are making use of attended bots. Unattended bots are of course a huge benefit. I can see the future if I use the 80/20 rule; I can see probably 80% of our bots will be unattended when we will implement 20% into attended bots for our organization at the moment. I don't know how that will look like if we say everybody in organization using bots, then of course attended bots will become very prominent, but where we are right now, I can see unattended bots will become very attractive for us right now, so probably seeing the bigger opportunities at the moment, and those big opportunities, unattended bots will be well suited for.

It is difficult to get your head around attended and unattended bots, but once you get to understand the differences, I think yeah. I can see benefits and pros and cons on both sides, but typically where we are now, we use attended bots. I can see us moving with our big opportunities into unattended bots, and where the future takes, I don't know. I'll let you know then.

I think it's the ease of use for the developer, so we can actually make use of people within subject matter experts rather than having fully fledged developers, so that's one of the main features. And, I think, based on that, it is actually the speed in which we can deliver some of these automations, so the delivery and the build of the box is actually much quicker than your conventional development, so those will be my two top points at this stage.

We've created a bot within our collections team. We are doing a reconciliation, and since implementing the bot, which was at the beginning of this year, we hadn't needed any changes onto the bot. 

Scalability very much so, so exactly that reconciliation bot we were able to apply to different reconciliations within our collections team, and they fall. Yes, it's very much scalable as well, so we are running four different bots at this stage for our collections reconciliation process.

I think we will probably make use of the community more, so asking questions within the community forum. I've not really had to engage with technical support directly apart from our sales person that we could ask questions from, etc., but generally, the technical questions are more posted onto the discussion forum and answers being given and taken from there.

Our proof of concept was done using PwC, and they've helped us build our proof of concept. The reason for that is they've delivered a piece of work where we wanted to see whether this has already been delivering a piece of work where this really fell into, so we engage with them often to help us deliver a proof of concept, and that was very successful, and of course that helped us roll up more into the business and taking a little bit more on internally rather than continuous support from PwC.

Coming from a person that doesn't' know much of robotics or anything of that, as it's a new technology. I think it was quite difficult to get your head around that first. Setting it up, installing the software's very easy on occasion, but getting a grasp and understanding of the difference between the studio and the difference between the robots in that regard was quite difficult to get your head around not only for us who's been setting up the center of excellence but also for explaining to the business the different components and then just understanding what the different components does, and I think it's maybe more around terminology. We're building a bot that's running on a bot, but the building of the bot is in studio.

It's a very easy concept, but it makes it difficult for the business to understand what you're talking about and what we're working in and what actually runs the bot and those type of things.

We are starting to see a return on investment. I won't be able to answer that right now, probably only be able to answer once I start analyzing it, but we are starting to see a return on investment. I think it will probably take a good few months before I can analyze how well we're doing. I think fairly soon we see a return on investment.

Does it fit in with the business, what they expect? I don't know. That's a given that the solution absolutely does, so if I come back to our original example of the reconciliation bot within our collections area. I think there's almost 100% human errors reduced. The bot doesn't make any errors, so we've seen it running smoothly for the last since the beginning of the year, so last nine, 10, 11 months.

Citrix environments are quite difficult. It takes more time to develop the bot itself. Accuracy's maybe a bit of an issue there, so from a Citrix type of environment, I'd probably try to avoid it from my side, but it's just because I don't like to work with the images. I'd rather work directly within hotkeys or whatever.

I think I would rate the product probably at about an eight, which is coming down to the usability. It's really easy to use. It is easy to implement and roll out getting people involved. I think there is drawbacks in terms of the understanding of where the process is, so it's maybe on our side, understanding the process and which processes are suitable for the bot and what the bot will be able to do then with those. I think taking a subject matter expert and giving them the expertise to build bots limits your ability to understand the full capacity of the product. I think there's a lot of things changing within the product very quickly and to keep up with all of the enhancements that you're making makes it a little bit difficult, but over all, it is very good, and if you apply correctly to your processes, you will definitely seen an improvement in your process and return on your investment.

UiPath is used to automate processes, eliminating the need to increase headcount.

There was an increase in both quality and quantity while not having to increase admin simultaneously. We have successfully automated the majority of our automation projects.

The UiPath automation has helped us to keep our bottom lines down across the board.

UiPath has helped our organization with its environmental and social initiatives.

It has freed staff time for other tasks, improved their work quality, and saved hundreds of hours per month.

UiPath is the best automation solution available today. The process and task management are the most valuable features.

UiPath's Unassisted Task Mining has room for improvement.

I have been using UiPath for four years.

UiPath's stability is reliable, especially now that we've moved to the cloud.

UiPath scales well. We have not had any issues.

UiPath support has been responsive to us.

Positive

UiPath has successfully met our expectations by reducing project costs through automation, demonstrating a strong return on investment.

I would rate UiPath ten out of ten.

I have used UiPath in my last three companies.

The process is for background checks. There are all kinds of checks such as academic, criminal, and work as well. We receive all the volume through the queues. We are using the citizen developer, StudioX, to get the cases and understand what are the fields and what are the requirements for each one of the cases. The bot will process them accordingly. For example, for each university or academic, there is a different process around the world.

The industry we use it for is HR. What we do with the backgrounds is providing a confirmation to our clients that people have the qualifications that they say they have. It is for data accuracy and consistency within the HR and talent acquisition departments.

Our AI-powered automation initiative has not yet changed what our organization is able to achieve because the project is still a pilot. We are still working a little bit on the environment. We are working through VDI, so it is not straightforward. We cannot just install or put UiPath to work. So far, we have not seen all the results, but we are looking forward to that in the next quarter.

UiPath would definitely free up time or resources for other tasks. We are a team of six people. We are estimating that two of them will be free for new projects. There is about 30% of resource savings.

Our usage is very simple. We have been getting the text, parsing it, and trying to categorize and analyze it. We are not using it fully, but the OCR is very important. This is a package from StudioX. With OCR, we will implement document reviews to make sure that whatever the applicant puts in the form is consistent with the document provided. For example, in academics, it will be your bachelor's or master's certificate.

The value proposition of implementing UiPath is that if we use UiPath and the RPA functionality, instead of passing the process to a BPO, we will start understanding the process and automating it as much as possible. We will have hybrid workflows between humans and robots. We will create capacity. We will have the same number of workers but increased capacity. We will start having conversations with our stakeholders on how to reinvest all of this capacity that has been liberated.

We have had some issues with StudioX. In terms of features, for now, I am pretty happy with UiPath. The requirements of the process to be automated are covered with the basic functionality. It is not exactly UiPath, but for security reasons, we are not able to download packages and use the functionality provided by the community with their developments. It is not on the side of UiPath. 

I was certified as a Citizen three years ago. That is the time frame that I have been using it.

Recently, there was a software update of StudioX. We had some bugs. I would rate it a five out of ten in terms of stability.

We are working on moving to the cloud, so scalability will be good.

We have internal support. I do not speak with the vendor. Our internal support system is pretty consistent. They have quick response times.

From my perspective, I do not think we have been using any other solution. We have been with UiPath for about eight years. I cannot confirm the number, but I know that we have been partners for a long time.

We also use AutoHotkey which is something similar but not a replacement. It is a software solution that allows you to reprogram your keyboard and put some functionality in there to automate some of the things, but it is not a replacement.

I was not involved in its deployment. It is on-prem right now. We are migrating the company to the GCP, so there may be some restraints in regard to that. Everything is currently on-prem, but we are working on going to the cloud.

The ROI would be in regard to the capacity. We estimate two FTEs to be free from this project.

We have not yet used UiPath's AI Center and many other features. We are using StudioX, so we are still in the citizen developer mode. We are not using the full functionality with Studio and all that. We have an RPA COE. They have much more complex processes and projects, but we have not used it for that. This UiPath convention has brought a lot of ideas in terms of how to start leveraging it more.

We have also not used UiPath Process Mining and Task Mining. I am working with one of my colleagues who is like a bridge between operations and IT.  We are working together to see how we can better use the technology to improve processes. I have to go team by team, understand the process, and go deeper to see where we can start using this technology. We will have a roadmap of where we need to go.

Overall, I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

I've been making some accelerators using it. Each Customer Relationship Management page in the telecom industry has a similar kind of structure, so things do not change a lot. I'm creating an accelerator that can log into a CRM and quickly perform specific tasks as per requirements. For example, the robot will log on to a CRM page, will add updated user information, and check the details of user requests. Another case could be creating specified user service requests and monitoring their status for service efficiency. 

We're automating a bunch of processes in the telecommunication industry. We’re implementing RPA solutions in the biggest telecommunications company in my country. Our main focus was to increase the return on investment. What we tried to do was reduce the time, reduce the manual labor costs and errors, and increase efficiency.

The big picture is to work towards reducing labor costs and creating solutions that are required to enhance your efficiency. This also streamlines process workflows when handling robot exceptions.

The drag-and-drop features and the activities that are pre-made are useful. It's a big plus for UiPath. Whenever I use it, I can do all kinds of work with it and it's really easy. For example, if you have to store data in a dictionary or make a list, there are all kinds of ways to do it. You can do almost anything using UiPath.

The community is very good. I get 90% of my questions answered there.

There’s a good level of maturity in the UiPath framework. Once you get hands-on experience with it and once you are a little bit familiar with it, it becomes really interesting to make automation.

Another thing to add would be queues. It gives you the power to assign multiple bots to any item in the queue and you can monitor the activities and status in the queue.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. Once you have hands-on experience with it, you don't even have to think about the steps. There are hundreds of activities to help you to carry out any solution. It enables you to perform endpoint processes really efficiently.

When you compare the solution to other automation companies, like Automation Anywhere or Microsoft Power Automate, UiPath has the biggest community, and that really helps you a lot. Whatever questions we have will get answered due to the extremely helpful and active community. You get answers pretty quickly as well. Most questions I have are already addressed there. It adds a lot of value to UiPath and plays a major role in our success.

I have done a few UiPath Academy courses. I have not gotten certifications, however, UiPath has advanced certifications and material on the website that lays out those certifications. They have a lot of tutorials to let you get deep into the product.

It's helped speed up our digital transformation. Our main focus has been on automation and increasing efficiencies while reducing errors and costs. Automation helps significantly reduce human error. 

The ease of building automation using UiPath is appreciable. In the beginning, it was a bit difficult as you have to know about C# and VB Script. I come from a Python background. If you are making a list, for example, in Python, it’s very simple. There isn’t that much complexity. If you're doing list manipulation and dictionary manipulation, you have all kinds of data structures. However, when it comes to UiPath, it is not as simple since you have to be very certain about what you're writing.

There are some things missing in UiPath. There used to be an activity where you could just add an item. This activity is now gone. Some of the things in UiPath are changing. This is a bit difficult due to the fact that, if a beginner is trying to add something to a dictionary, they'll have to look through the community's communications and then they might figure out that the old ways are gone. But that is not always the case, there have been better and newly modified activities like ones that help choose selectors for UI Automation.

UiPath is not that fast. They do have an option to increase the speed of processes. You can increase their speed in the settings. However, whenever you do that, the chances of it curbing the flow at some point is higher. 

I've been using it for the last three months. I jumped into this field of automation about six months ago. I have explored Power Automate, Robocorp, and Automation Anywhere during this time. UiPath, however, has been a good experience so far.

The stability is okay and chances of bottlenecking are not much. Occasionally there are some errors and the robots do crash but overall that is not an issue. 

It's a mature product; it can scale well. It's pretty sophisticated so you can get a lot of scalability in the automation process. 

I have not contacted technical support. I'm a beginner, and usually, I turn to the UiPath community forums. Many problems are answered right in the community itself. 

I was using Autosphere before UiPath. I've also used Automation Anywhere and Robocorp. UiPath is for developers and business users. UiPath is far superior to Automation Anywhere, however, when it comes to speed, I feel that Autosphere and Robocorp are faster than UiPath.

I was not involved in the initial deployment. 

They do give a bit of support with processes. However, after a few months, the solution does require some maintenance. We also supply support and our clients hardly need it anymore. 

The cost used to be fine, however, Microsoft has reduced its costs significantly and that's going to be a challenge for UiPath. In comparison to other automation products, UiPath is reasonable. 

I'm an end-user and an administrator. 

I'm not using the AI functionality apart from OCR-related solutions. However, there is a huge market for it. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. This solution offers a lot. It's a good product to try. 

We use it for making end-to-end projects. We are working with a commodity trading company where we have automated almost 150 processes. We have automated daily tasks or repetitive tasks.

It allows us to implement end-to-end automation. It's an ongoing activity where everybody is involved in automating things. Everybody is looking for a cost-effective output. With manual processes, there are chances of errors, but with UiPath, there are no errors.

It's cost-effective. For example, if ten members of a team are working on a given task, with UiPath, that task can be done by one member. It saves costs for our clients, and they can use the freed-up employees for other important tasks. So, it saves time and costs and improves accuracy for our clients.

It helps to minimize the on-premises footprint.

It speeds up digital transformation or reduces the cost of digital transformation. Doing so doesn't require expensive or complex application upgrades or IT application support.

It reduces a lot of human errors. It also frees up employees' time, but there is a drawback. Previously, if a hundred-member team was working on a given task, after automation, you don't need that many people, and they end up losing their jobs. That's applicable to any kind of automation case or any of the automation apps. The time saved with automation varies. It depends on the project.

It's user-friendly. The UI is very user-friendly. It's quick to learn. Anyone can learn this tool.

The Orchestrator feature given in UiPath is very good for monitoring processes. We get alerts for everything on time.

The ReFramework feature available in UiPath is widely used. We have almost 90% of the processes running on ReFramework. Other built-in features are also very good. Exception handling is a very good feature that has been introduced in ReFramework.

The Insights feature that they have recently introduced is also very good. We can create dashboards and configure alerts.

The UiPath community is good. They also provide free-of-cost UiPath Academy where any beginner can learn about UiPath free of cost and get certified. It's a very good service provided by UiPath. I used UiPath Academy when I started with UiPath. The courses are very well prepared and detailed. There are videos, and there is a theoretical part. At the end of every course chapter, you have to take a test, so you get to know how good you are at that part. Each and every point and detail has been covered in the UiPath Academy courses.

I have not used it that much. It has been more than enough for my needs. However, its stability could be better. There are cases where because of the UiPath upgrade, some of the activity features get upgraded, and the processes that we have designed using an older version of UiPath don't run after the upgrade. In such scenarios, we have to downgrade and use only the older version. We have seen issues in that part. It's good to add new features, but that shouldn't impact the existing development of processes that we have done for our end users. We shouldn't have had to design features using the older version. We find it difficult when they remove or change features with the upgrade. We have to reach out to the UiPath community for a solution.

We have been using this solution for 2.5 years.

I'd rate it a seven out of ten in terms of stability.

I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

They are very quick. They have separate teams. You can email them your query and you get a response within two to three hours. I'd rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I've used another tool previously, but we could only automate a limited number of processes with that tool, whereas, with UiPath, we don't have any such limitation. 

I wasn't involved in its setup.

I didn't evaluate other options. I had heard of Automation Anywhere, but more people were using UiPath, so I also chose that.

It's very good. I'd recommend it to everybody. You should use UiPath instead of any other tool.

If somebody wants to learn UiPath, I'd recommend UiPath Academy instead of purchasing a course from any of the other platforms or going to a class.

I'd rate UiPath a ten out of ten.