UiPath Reviews

We do not directly use UiPath in our organization but we do have some use cases. One of those is sending bulletins. These are the notification emails that go to users on their birthdays, on their work anniversaries, sometimes they are sent after some sort of achievement, like if they have a baby. These notifications go via UiPath. 

The way it works is that the data is maintained within our tracking sheet, which is sometimes on SharePoint, and UiPath uses this tracking sheet to check the data in addition to the user and will cc everyone within the organization. For example, when we receive birthday emails, it goes to the person whose birthday it is on that day and cc's in everyone within the organization or within the relevant department. 

In the case of one of the clients I've worked with, they're working on a process where they need to provide students with a student visa pass. It's within Singapore and every student that has joined this institute needs to apply over a website. 5000 applications are received every year. These applications need to be manually added to the government website.

We automated this process, starting from the beginning to the end. There's a lot of interaction required. The team worked on an Excel sheet. In fact, a number of people work on these Excel sheets. With many people, there's always a chance of misleading data, as I might at one point be doing some more revision on the sheet, and someone at the other point might be doing more revisions. There is the chance that data will clash. In order to make sure that this won't happen, we came up with a SharePoint list where we could add the data, and if anyone changes anything, there's a simple and clear record of who made the changes, and what the change was.

At the same time, the bot can work on the SharePoint list as well - and there is no chance of a clash occurring. We can create a process and a number of steps that involve reading the data and extracting data from an application while swapping or extracting data between two forms. 

There's a lot of swapping. We extracted the data via the backend, via the database, and directly put that into the IC application. The processing time for this application previously was somewhere around 20 minutes. Per record now, the time has been reduced to three minutes. Previously, there were 18 people working on any particular application. Right now, there are only two bots working on this website, and they are doing work like magic. 

If we look at the development part, UiPath Studio has been great due to its ease of use and its UI. The availability of the UI store helps us understand the complete pre-hierarchy of the UI elements that's available on the browser or website. It's easy to use and it can be manipulated in the way we want it to. It allows us to do more work on the browsers. 

The integration aspect is very useful. Right now, I'm working on SharePoint and that integrates nicely with UiPath. The integration model is really, really great, and 99.9% of the time it works. While technology can fail occasionally, UiPath has a great track record. 

The ease of building automation using UiPath is quite good. The kind of projects or processes we have been able to automate has been helpful. We need to determine if it's a complex process, which is dictated by the number of steps. We look at the number of steps and work to determine if we can improvise and reduce the number of steps, and, if so, how. We look at if the process ever requires human intervention and where. The type of human intervention might dictate the complexity of the process, as well, for example, the number of applications we are working on. We might have to write some code on the backend or maybe we are working with an API. Everything needs to be assessed before going into an automation process.

UiPath has reduced human errors. Previously, everything was manually tracked with changes noted on the tracking sheet and we would do a copy/paste from one place to another. There was always a chance of human error. However, when this process is automated, there was zero chance for mistakes. While there may be exceptions, it would be only in rare instances the automation itself would make an error.

The product definitely reduces cost. If a company deploys automation within their organization, they need to understand that automation needs some time. One process will not necessarily reduce the cost. They need to see there will be results in the long run. It just takes time and they have to understand automation. They have to implement automation within the organization. Often, organizations will start the automation process, and then they leave it as they believe the cost is going up. They perceive this due to the fact that they need a separate system for development, a separate system for testing, and a separate system for operation, plus they need three servers for the Orchestrator. However, in the long run, automation actually lowers costs. It's just a hard up-front number to look at.

Whether or not the solution has freed an employee's time depends. If you talk about the business level, definitely not, due to the fact that, for them, it might be a burden. To the business, it might be a burden. However, if you talk to the IT department or IT level people who are working differently from users they would say that the best thing is that deployment is easy, debugging is easy, logging is very easy, and tracking is very easy. Anyone from IT can easily track how things are going. Yet, if we are talking about it from the point of view of business, for them it's not their cup of tea.

For example, if the system freezes on a person, they just close the browser, however, if the system freezes on a bot, from that moment everything must be manually re-initiated. For a regular business user, doing that process may go above their head and they may not understand how to fix it.

The Orchestrator portion can be difficult. Previously, the Orchestrator which everyone was using, was quite simple to use. However, the new one is quite complex to understand. Even with developers, they sometimes don't understand it either. 

There's a lot of things coming up that need to be learned. They need to put some more information into the academy to help others understand the Orchestrator end-to-end, especially for the new version. The previous one was quite easy. The new one is very inefficient in terms of the user interface. That's the area that I find still needs improvement.

I would suggest that they should provide a more disciplined document where users can see what exactly needs to be done in case of failure. For example, there's a very clever document on the deployment of the setup, but there's no documentation on what happens if there is a failure. Users need to be made aware of what to do if exceptions happen. 

UiPath is already aware of these exception scenarios, and when you call support they know what needs to be done. These details need to be on documents somewhere, maybe in the form of knowledge articles. That way, if someone has some issue, they can go to an article and see what's going on. 

I've used the solution for about four years now. 

Stability-wise, it's really good. When it comes to backend automation, it's amazing. With the UI automation in mind, I would say it's quite stable. However, there is a chance of errors. I would say, if you're doing a process based on a UI interaction, the stability it gives is somewhere around 5% to 10% on each process. Again, it depends on a number of things, such as the start-up package you are working with and/or what is the response of that individual. It's something that somewhat falls outside of UiPath, in terms of stability, however, when it comes to the process, everything counts. Even, for example, electricity counts. If there's system slowness or a system crash, it can affect everything, even if it's not necessarily caused by UiPath.

Attended automation has helped to scale RPA benefits. It is scalable, as, moving forward, there are multiple processes in relation to the same person, and right now it's done manually by a number of users. Probably, in the future, we can help develop a direction for that. Right now, the client is happy with what they got.

The solution is quite scalable. It's easy to scale a process or a UI. With big automation, it depends on the number of people who are going to utilize it. In those cases, we need to make sure that that network is available to scale. If you don't take into account the number of users, or if there are a lot of people using it, then the chances of failure can go up. That said, it depends on how big the organization is and what sort of licenses were bought from UiPath. 

I have not really used technical support, and therefore cannot comment. With Studio, we've had maybe a few minor interactions. It's the same with Orchestrator.

I have worked with a number of tools including Automation Anywhere, Blue Prism, WorkFusion, Kryon, and Kofax. I have knowledge of a lot of other tools. 

Kryon, for example, has a process discovery feature, and UiPath also started up with this process development. However, what Kryon provides is amazing. The way they capture everything, the way output comes, the way each step is explained with the process, et cetera, makes discovery on Kryon amazing. In comparison to UiPath, UiPath just isn't as good in this area.

WorkFusion integrates well with the part where we have to read documents, especially bot scanned reading. UiPath does not have these capabilities, as of now, on its own. You can integrate Abbyy with UiPath, however, that's a different tool altogether. With Fusion and with Kofax, these features are amazing. On top of that, their invoice capabilities are amazing. There's a vast difference between UiPath and Kofax and Fusion when it comes to reading documents. 

That said, when it comes to working on the backend automation, when it comes to working with the UI automation, UiPath stands out from the crowd. It's amazing. The way it writes, the way it provides precision handling, the way it works with the queue, et cetera, is amazing. There is no other tool on the market that offers these capabilities. 

The one feature that I believe should be better with UiPath, however, is storing data in an independent manner. With UiPath, even though you store your password on the Orchestrator with the credentials, or even with any credential manager if you get at the end of the day and somebody has not reviewed your quote, you can tell your boss to send his password in a simple text format. This is where the UiPath lacks, and this is where Blue Prism comes into the picture. It's just better at securing data. People prefer Blue Prism for this reason over UiPath. 

With my current organization, the department model is quite simple. We have three different environments for this: development, testing (what we call acuity), and production models. We have these three stages of deployment that we deploy robots and the Orchestrator based on the requirement of clients.

The deployment took a maximum of one to two hours from one machine to another machine. A complete department deployment, however, depends on the process type we are working on, as there are some features we need to develop. Apart from publishing these packages, the deployment of the server, or of the Orchestrator, or the deployment of Studio, will take a day or two to do the complete setup on one machine.

In terms of the implementation strategy, the first thing to do is the pre-checks. We need to figure out what sort of system we need. Therefore, we need to first confirm the prerequisites. Once that is done, we need to download a package and install it, and then apply the license. After all of that, we just need to create one small robot just to check that everything is working fine. There are some tools that need to be installed with that. For example, if we are working on UI automation, in that case, we need to install an extension. If we need to install the network load balancer as well, we need to install some of the prerequisite packages on the machine, on the server, to make sure that this runs smoothly.

While the licensing models are quite simple, as a developer, I don't handle details about pricing or cost.

My company does not directly partner with UiPath, however, it's a partner via a client. If anything happens with the client, it goes from my company via one of those stakeholders who take care of these things.

Currently, we use attended automation. The reason being is, it's more about password prediction, as the company does not want to store the passwords. There are a number of options that we have given to users where they can store their passwords in the credential manager. However, the company does not want to do that. The only reason we are using attended is for this, which is that the user has to manually go and insert the credentials.

I have not yet used UiPath's AI functionality in any automation programs. I have done some POCs for this, for documents in this setting. However, we've never practically implemented it within the organization.

With the current organization and with the current client we are not using Orchestrator at all. We only use attended robots and not Studio and Orchestrator. However, with other clients, we have used the cloud-based enterprise Orchestrator and have had the Orchestrator installed within the premises of the organization. I've used both.

I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Most of our use cases are related to business, like reconciliation and reporting. Therein, they have some internal applications to automate SAP automation and Salesforce Automation. Our most recent use case is related to documents, like the invoices coming from customers. We have to extract that data from invoices via different formats, e.g., some are digital formats and some are scanned formats. So, we have to extract the data, which we are doing with the help of UiPath.

We are using both attended and unattended automation. For 90 percent of our use cases, we are using UiPath for unattended automation.

I use UiPath almost every day. When I finish developing one process, there is a new process to develop. If a process is complex, it almost takes six to eight weeks to develop it, then you have to deploy it for monitoring. After that, the next process comes up.

UiPath helps based on how it is configured. In our case, there are so many transactions coming in, it is not possible for a human to complete them in nine hours (working hours). So, we went with unattended bots, which we mostly run at night. We start the bots after the working hours of humans, so when the operations team returns in the morning, their work is complete.

From a developer perspective, the process is smooth and easy. You can find a solution on Google easily. You can develop your own code. From a technical perspective, it is 100 percent.

UiPath Studio is great. It has all the activities. You don't have to write anything. Even after that, if you feel that you have to do something for yourself, then you can write your on-premises code in it and develop your own framework. Everything is there. You just have to use UiPath Studio.

if you are a business user, even if you don't have a technical team, you can install the second version of the Community edition, which is StudioX. This is specifically made for business people who don't have a lot of ideas about technicalities. This is a great feature.

If websites are made in a recent programming format, it is very easy to automate them with the help of UiPath. However, if that technology is based on legacy applications, then it is very fragile and hard to do that. So, we have to choose the technology first, and if the technology is new, then you can easily automate it with other applications or the help of an RPA tool.

The process can be complex if an application is a legacy application or the data is unstructured. The analysis of some bots is lacking. If a customer asks for analysis of a particular bot, you cannot just get the data from the UiPath and give it to the customer. It is not that easy. I would rate this process as a seven or eight (out of 10).

The Document Understanding feature should be more developed and advanced. For example, you have to make a template with their ML model. Currently, we can't use our own ML model, and we have to use the UiPath ML model. UiPath has only a few ML models right now. They should come up with more ML models or make it easier for us to use our own ML model. While they are working on this, I have felt much difficulty in extracting data during our last process for Document Understanding. We had to go with the Python language. So, I think they are lacking in this feature.

After deploying the bots in production, processes are very stable, unless something happens with the machine. You don't have to monitor a process every time. So, I am very impressed and satisfied with things.

We are looking to update to version 20.

This solution is very much scalable. If you are working in a small or large organization, it doesn't matter. It is very much scalable, up to anything.

We have a team of around 100 to 120 people in RPA automation, in which 60 or 70 users have the developer license. 

I am very much impressed and satisfied with the UiPath solution. Earlier, I used the Automation Anywhere solution, and it is sort of messy and complex. You have to pull everything from a single workflow. Then, I moved to UiPath, and everything was very sorted. If you really like coding, you can do that. It gives you a real developer type feel.

Developing and deploying robots with UiPath is very straightforward. It hardly takes five minutes to deploy a process on Orchestrator.

The last process that UiPath covered saved the work of two people.

If you have repetitive tasks, you can apply UiPath and have your people trained to do other work.

If you want to start doing RPA, I think you should definitely go with UiPath because it has the Community edition. You can just install it and check whether or not your process works fine with UiPath. It will be an attended bot, but you can form an idea whether your bot can easily be automated.

We have one use case related to Microsoft Word Automation. Word Automation is not compatible with other tools. However, in UiPath, we were able to write our own code to automate and format the Word document, which is why UiPath Studio is the most valuable feature. We are also using the Automation Anywhere. But, in Automation Anywhere, we cannot write our own code. So, we can't automate Word Automation from Automation Anywhere as well.

Automation Anywhere has come out with its own new version of 2019, which is as effective as UiPath. However, when I have tried to run or deploy the bots, it still lacks in features. For example, in UiPath, AML activities are coming up very frequently. Whereas, in Automation Anywhere, these features are lacking, which is why I go with UiPath. Also, Citrix automation is very good with UiPath. You feel like you are able to detect the elements and images.

UiPath gives you REFramework, which is absolutely amazing for business use cases. Automation Anywhere also lacks this feature. With Automation Anywhere, you need to make your own framework, and if you are making your own framework, then the look becomes messy. If someone is trying to understand it, then they have to spend more time on the framework to understand it.

I use the IQ Bot of Automation Anywhere, and even after training a hundred documents, it's not picking up or extracting the data from documents. I feel like I have to train the model again, which is not the case with Document Understanding. If you properly make the templates in Document Understanding of UiPath, it gives you full text values. So, it is more advanced and suitable for me.

We use UiPath Assistant to run processes about 10 percent of the time. Most of the time, we are using Orchestrator. 

UiPath releases new features every 15 days to a month. They have already come up with AI and machine learning.

If scanned documents are coming in for some of the work, we are also using Python language for this.

If you already have a technical team, then you can ask them to look into UiPath Academy. If they have basic knowledge of programming or coding, then even in seven days, they can easily learn UiPath and start applying it in their organization. You don't need to hire outside developers.

Overall, the solution is a nine (out of 10).

We are using attended automation. I help drive a lot of products in UiPath. Now, we are using their data process mining and document understanding features. We are creating forms, then putting data on the forms, so our attended bots will work.

We use UiPath to resolve customer complaints by creating buttons that link to back-end integrations.

Employees can see information very quickly, reducing a lot of complications.

Uipth gives us as good speed and accuracy to improve all the bot la performance.

I like the document understanding feature. It gives us more accuracy. 

The AI and machine learning features are very useful for us.

UI Targets enabled us to quickly build automations within multiple applications, even without the right connectors. For example, we can drag and drop Outlook activities.

We use UiPath selector technology is a wonderful feature, especially compared to other RPA tools.

From mobile applications, we use Orchestrator where we can monitor processes and share them. 

Need more AI and Machine learning build technology and integration of 3rd party applications. Need some improvements in orchestrator

We have been using it for around two years.

5,000 people are using UiPath.

Any queries that we have, we can go onto their forums. If there are issues, we can contact their support and they will resolve them.

We have used Automation Anywhere, which is complex to understand. 

The initial deployment was not complex.

I will rate the level of expertise is 9(out of ten)

The attended automation has saved us time.

The pricing is average; it is not too high nor too low.

Its speed is better than other RPA solutions. They release more updates, details, and features compared to their competitors. 

We can learn from UiPath Academy.

I would rate the solution as a nine (out of 10).

We are a UiPath customer, working with them to develop some products. It is a bit of a mixed thing where we are developing some products with them from scratch, but they are acting as the provider. We develop things, and if they're useful for others, then others can use them.

We are doing some pretty bespoke things to help us develop some solutions, but also help them develop their UI solutions in the legal area. We are working on a few things with UiPath to develop some search robots, some solutions to automatize subcontracts, and some timekeeping entries. These are several things that we are doing right now.

We are doing three things with them:

1. A robot to help us with software for time management, automating time entries. 
2. A robot to help us with filling in our engagement letters (contracts). 
3. A robot to help us with various public searches, i.e., the automation of searches of the public record.

We are adjusting robots from similar things that they do. The robots are not yet in production. 

The most valuable feature is its ability to save time with a task. In general, it improves accuracy as well.

UiPath's ease of use for automating our company's processes is a five out of five. We have found it very easy to talk to them, identifying what can be done along with the potential use cases. They have been very good at guiding us through what is realistic at this point, how their robots could help us save time and improve accuracy, and how our users can engage with their robots, e.g., ensuring that users engage with the robots and use their product. 

When we started to talk about practical implementation, their team was extremely switched onto identifying and fitting their product to our needs. They explained to us how we can use their products, what can be done to adapt their product, and what may happen sometime in the future, not necessarily now. I found this very helpful and straightforward.

What we have in mind in terms of what the robots could do for us is significantly more than what UiPath does now, but it takes more work. From my perspective, there is just a wide scope of implementation that goes beyond what we're starting right now. That is essentially the improvement. While I have nothing negative to say about our experience with them so far, I think we can work to develop more complex products with them. They are already working to develop something for our use cases, but what I would like is if we could develop more things for more complex needs, e.g., where we start with simpler stuff, then we can add things to what we're doing now.

We are in the development phase.

It is too early. We are still in development.

During the development phase, there are five people involved in the development phase. The users will be about 100.

We have not used their support.

We were not previously using something in this area. 

We have been thinking about ways to streamline our activities using technology. It happens that we knew UiPath, so we started to engage with them about what they could do for us. We had something like 20 ideas that we could implement, then we just started the easier ones which were closer to the products that they have. As things go, we will see whether we expand to other things.

We have known UiPath quite well and for a long time. They are also the leaders in the field, so it was a very easy choice.

The initial setup was quite straightforward. We started to discuss potential solutions, then we met with parts of their team, developing that business area. After that, we met with the technical people designing the product. We had a couple of initial conversations and did some testing. It has been extremely simple and straightforward.

We are supposed to review some of their proposals and provide feedback. We are probably a week or two away from production.

UiPath could have probably implemented the solution in a couple of weeks. We had some delays on our side.

We did the initial setup ourselves.

It is important for whatever we implement that it's cost effective in a sense that the robots will replace some human time. If human time costs less than the robot, then that's not a good deal. Normally, human time will cost more than a robot, and that's what we're trying to displace: the human time. We want to replace it with a cheaper robot. 

We only looked at UiPath, because we know them quite well.

So far, the experience has been excellent. I would rate the solution 10 out of 10, but we haven't finished the implementation.

Look internally what your needs are. Try to identify what you could improve with software robots, ensuring these needs are clearly identified and the product is fit for purpose. Also, you should make sure there will be buy-in in the organization, so people will actually use the product.

We have a system to create a multiple orders to perform automation testing. Here, UiPath helps us to create a bunch of orders without the hassle of creating a separate automation suite for this need.

When creating orders manually became a tough job for the user then it needed a benchmark for us to resolve this kind of situation to make teams more agile at work. This motivated us to find a solution to counter this problem in our organization. Definitely, it has helped to make us more agile. 

UiPath has helped us to achieve our goal as we are able to do what we intended to with automation. We are now dependent on UiPath to create the orders instead of having to do this manually. Earlier, this used to happen in a very traditional way and it was time-consuming, but UiPath has helped to perform this task with lightning speed. Now, we have more focus on implementing other things smoothly. 

Scraping data from the application using OCR and other text validation features is amazing in UiPath. These have helped us to create a reliable solution for our needs.

UiPath support needs to be a bit quicker than it is currently. They need to be very quick when they see a customer is struggling with something and taking the step to contact support.

The UiPath team needs to put some effort into improving the support section online. They should also improve the UiPath community forum so that beginners can receive help with activities that they require. 

I have been using UiPath for the past eight months.

Stability is a part where I would definitely rate UiPath a five out of five. It is really the best among all RPA products in this regard. 

We have a small flow that we have automated, but I feel UiPath will not let us down if we increase the capacity.

This is a part where I really think that UiPath needs improvement. They need to take up the issues from customers very quickly and resolve them on the highest priority.

We had not used any other RPA solution before UiPath.

This solution is very easy to set up. There is a bit of a hassle if support is expected from the UiPath team.

We have implemented using our internal team.

Significant manual efforts put into tasks have been reduced and a good amount of time is being saved. Overall, our time savings results in ROI.

The setup cost is minimal as far as other options are considered. 

We did indeed evaluate other options before choosing UiPath. We thought to use Automation Anywhere for our RPA needs but after doing some research, we chose UiPath.

During the evaluation process, we found significant failures when performing tests on exactly the same tasks.

UiPath is the most amazing RPA solution available in the market. Certainly, this gets plus points when it comes to feature versus cost ratio. Therefore, I would highly recommend UiPath because it comes with more stability and reliability than other solutions.

There are some features like different types of recorders. For example, Citrix and desktop are the variants we have in UiPath to solve our problems.

Other than the issues with technical support, I think that UiPath is a complete package for automating solutions in a rapid and fast environment.

I am an RPA developer and I am primarily using this solution to fill up timesheets in an internal portal. I use Windows 10, 64 bit. My team uses a mix of Windows 7, 8, and 10. It is suitable for daily and weekly tasks, which pretty much don't change over time, and is what I choose to automate parts of my team's work.

We are an IT company that works on both products and services. UiPath has helped to automate tedious data-filling jobs for test data creation (Testing), and data extraction jobs from public websites (HR). It has added a new capability which we can showcase to our clients.

Data Scraping is definitely a unique and useful feature that we had not known about before.

Smooth integration of OCR, which is very quick, is a useful feature.

Manage packages to get more packages.

Save as a Template feature.

Snippets are really useful as a reference for logic.

Plus button between activities & Ctrl+Shift+T is very useful in adding activities quickly.

Having the ability to run the bot from a single click will help to democratize the RPA.

Currently, I am running the XAML file from command prompt mode and this is causing inconvenience every time I update the XAML file.

The regular update of the Community Edition means that the UiRobot path is constantly changing on every update.

I have been using UiPath for the past one and a half years.

There are not many complaints on the stability of this solution. Though the regular updates of the Community Edition have given me trouble at times, it has been quickly resolved in the subsequent updates. I think that the UiPath Forum portal is one reason for this.

According to me, on one side it is creating a buzz and everybody wants to be part of it. On the other side, there is resistance to embrace new technology in their process. Only over time, this can be scalable and it cannot be done quickly.

This was my first RPA tool.

The initial setup is straight forward. This got better after integrating the Chrome extension setup in the UiPath studio itself.

I did not evaluate other RPA tools.

The UiPath product team is doing an awesome job. Keep it up.

Our primary use case is the Automation of invoice processing.

We're looking to automate some processes like invoicing in order to make the organization more efficient and reduce workload for the employees. Invoices are non-structured or semi-structured data, so we're going to use OCR to extract the data and then automate the invoice process.

We have automated some processes and have reduced the time that users take while doing those tasks. For example, we use to manually fill in certain forms with the chargebacks, and now we use Clockify Time Tracker with automation that fills in the forms and uploads them to SharePoint.

The Screen Recorder has a lot of different features like web and desktop. Native and Citrix Recording are pretty useful for speeding up the design process. 

Computer Vision using Microsoft and Tesseract are pretty useful.

The new release of Studio X is a game-changer because this new app focuses on Business users. It is going to be useful for the organization because they can start creating their own automations.

They should add chatbots functionality for Microsoft Teams and not only for Slack.

They could give more information about beta / pre-releases so more people can test them and give their feedback.

Keep updating the documentation because sometimes you get redirected to a non-existent page or an old version of the activity. 

We have been using UiPath for six months.

UiPath is pretty stable and if you have any issues with a new version you can rollback.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup is straightforward. There's a lot of documentation also you have the forum if you are facing any issue.

My advice is to ask about how the licensing works and how to get access to the other services that UiPath provides.

Before choosing UiPath, we evaluated Datamatics, AntWorks, and Blue Prism.

I would suggest downloading the Community Edition and testing UiPath yourself. Join the automation first industry.

We use UiPath for building business cases for customers and internally building RPA competency within my department. Our organization is just starting to implement RPA. As a business consultant, UiPath is our chosen solution for RPA implementation. 

UiPath has made it very easy to create business cases to showcase to executives the functionality and benefits of RPA. UiPath was instrumental in my initial business case, as they came in and executed the proof of concept. That was a huge help and my customer was very pleased.

I find the community most valuable as it allows you to find your solutions and people to help you.

I like being able to save components to reuse for other processes and not having to start from scratch each time.

I appreciate the simplicity of the interface as I am learning to be a developer.

I would say a better layout or interface between the Studio and Orchestrator tools would be nice.

I have been using UiPath for five months.

We did not use another solution prior to UiPath.

I'd advise others to consider sharing the costs after ensuring they understand their expectations for utilizing the capacity of the robots. Share the cost if you forecast not utilizing the entire capacity.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing UiPath.

There is already a new release and I am pleased so far. I think UiPath has done a great job making resources and tools available as well as providing opportunities for learning directly from their company and in the same quality as their employees.