UiPath Reviews

We are primarily utilizing the platform within our department to gain buy-in for the customer's system.

We are a traditional development team, and using this platform has enabled us to work with multiple teams efficiently.

The governance aspect is very important to us. UFS Studio is also crucial for our operations.

There are significant delays between the technical team and the actual team. We are also missing some integrations with Google.

I cannot specify the exact amount of time we've been using it.

We have a dedicated development team. That said, we do have the resources to help with implementation.

I cannot speak on how it compares to other models or other components.

UiPath is deployed on AWS EC2 instances, and we use it for basic automation.  Very few developers are working on UiPath here. Our end-users don't deal with this. We only use our database and the data collected from UiPath, but the automation is not visible to our customers. We only use it in our internal development or design phase or to collect some automated data. 

We haven't used UiPath's machine learning capabilities, but we are working on that. That could be useful in a few use cases for triggering some queues and running processes in the background. We are using asynchronous jobs, but we don't rely on AI yet.

It helps us design the automation capabilities of our products. You can quickly create some AI-driven, easy-to-use, automated tracking products. We can also design the workflow to enhance the optimal automation process. Before using UiPath, we needed to write code to define some UI tasks manually. It required a vast amount of coding and used up much of our developer bandwidth. 

UiPath saves us some time and development costs by helping us quickly design some automated tasks and workflows. We reduced our work time by at least 70 percent because developers no longer need to write a considerable amount of code for a single automated task. UiPath can do all of that.

The drag-and-drop APIs reduce the time it takes to build workflows because we can define an orchestration URL and how we log in to the system. We can easily define entire edge cases and workflows. This helps us a lot. The AI will help us, too, but we are still in the development phase. 

In the early stages, it took a little time to see value from UiPath. Our engineering team needed to learn the product, but we were good to go in two weeks. 

I find the whole product useful, but I like the intuitive design the best. It's a well-designed UI, and it's comfortable for this use case. You can easily automate anything. The drag-and-drop APIs make things easier for us. We can simply drag and drop based on our application requirements, so things go smoother and faster.

UiPath should improve the test case criteria in future versions because the test cases are not well-designed. I feel everything is fine other than that.

I've been using UiPath for about two and a half years.

We have been using this for about one and a half years, and it's highly stable so far. 

Based on our current use case, we believe we can scale toward the AI path of that product, and we are still in the process of evaluating this. Once we implement the AI features, we expect to scale up further.

I rate UiPath support nine out of ten. I'm impressed with them. It has a steep learning curve, but UiPath provides a lot of online documentation, helping us figure out everything ourselves.

The technical support from the updates team is nice. They provide instant support for any issue, but we've barely used them because everything is well-documented, and the UI is intuitive. 

We were working on coding architecture and directly defining and using our code.

A different team handled the installation. We have two people managing the solution, but it doesn't require much maintenance. We install patches about once a year. The updates can affect our data and the process we use, so that's a challenge sometimes. 

We have definitely seen a return because UiPath has cut the engineering cost significantly. It frees up our engineers to do other tasks. It has reduced our workload by around 80 percent. We still required one or two developers to develop all these UI cases.

We find UiPath's total cost of ownership is cheaper because we significantly reduced the resources required for development. We believe it's a reasonable price for the value we get in this application use case.

We tried Automated Anywhere, but that doesn't work for us. UiPath provides much more features, and we can enhance things better. UiPath's drag-and-drop functionality also makes things easier for us. After trying these two products, we found that UiPath is a major gamechanger for our use case.

I rate UiPath an eight out of ten. The test cases could be better, and we're still evaluating the AI-driven part. Otherwise, I would rate this as a nine. I highly recommend this product because of all the advantages it offers, and UiPath has great documentation and videos available on multiple channels. It has considerably reduced the manual work we are doing. 

I'm a consultant. Right now, I work on supply chain coordination. I have also used UiPath for finances, for building reports for engineering, and for human resources departments.

The solution is on-premises, but we are migrating to the cloud.

The solution helps a lot when we are dealing with big companies where governance is a must. We can have multiple centers of excellence at different places in the company. UiPath is easy to deploy and easy to manage for such companies as we can centralize a lot of things in one place.

For example, with Orchestrator not only can we monitor all the bots and processes, but it helps in the development phase as well. If we want to have custom libraries that solve specific problems for the company, we can create those custom libraries and share them throughout the organization. This helps a lot when it comes to governance, compared to other automation solutions.

I created a project based on attended automation and it was successful in helping the user. It was a bot to create engineering reports and the user was able to implement it on a daily basis. I have a positive view of attended automations. Having said that, unattended bots are preferable because we want most of the processes to be automated, end-to-end, and not require the user to start them. We use attended robots only when there is no other solution. So attended bots are not as relevant as unattended robots, in my experience.

In addition, because the user did not need to create that report anymore, he could focus on more analytical thinking. That is something that I always say when starting an RPA project. Users become freer to do analytical thinking and not robotic thinking where they just click here and there and move some Excel files. I would estimate it saved them five to eight hours a week.

In a lot of the projects I have worked on, reducing human error was one of the priorities for the automation. When working with human resources, for example, reports could go wrong if the user did not create them properly. This could cause the company to have to pay fees. Automating those reports reduced the risk to zero and helped with compliance.

UiPath also reduces the overall costs of automation operations. Although it's more expensive as a solution when compared to other vendors, because it's a very consistent application and there is really good support from the UiPath team, it is the fastest when it comes to developing and deploying automation. It is surely the most reliable in the long term. That's where UiPath is at the top.

The best feature, for sure, is the ease of development. It's very easy to create an automation from scratch. Time to production is really fast when everything is already set up and we have a clear view of what needs to be done. UiPath has a more friendly development environment compared to other vendors of RPA.

And the Task Capture feature helps implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis. Task Capture helps us map a business process from start, and it can generate code in UiPath's Studio development platform. If you use it correctly, it definitely helps.

And with Orchestrator, we can keep watch over all the executions and also create easy integrations with BI tools like Power BI and Tableau, if I need some extra analysis on the data that is being processed. Orchestrator provides everything that I need for monitoring.

Although they add a lot of enhancements every month to the solution in general, they could focus more on UiPath Studio. I would like to see them add more features for developers who have a deeper understanding of programming languages. 

They could also make it easier to integrate custom-made functions.

One of the downsides of Automation Cloud, and this is more an issue related to the Community version, is that they always place the newest features on the Community version. I have experienced some issues when implementing automations on that version because things can change from one day to another. Some of these changes can impact automations that were running. But when it comes to the Enterprise version, things are very stable. They will never change things like that from one day to the next.

I've been using UiPath for about three years.

It's pretty stable. I have never gotten errors on the connection between the bots, Orchestrator, and Studio. 

The errors I have found are generally related to the network or to a virtual machine with fewer resources than the minimum requirements. 

The overall execution of the automations is pretty fast, even when dealing with high volumes of data from Excel files, compared to VBA or another scripting tool.

I have opened tickets with UiPath and they have helped me a lot in solving the issues. I have never had major issues with support. If I need to open an urgent ticket, I get a response on the same day. They call me to solve the issue together with them, if needed.

It's also really good that UiPath has a strong community. They started the idea of sharing new features and engaging the community. That has definitely helped UiPath to be on the list of the top vendors. There were times when I reached out to the community and they were very fast in helping me solve a question or get through an error. The community, for me, is one of the differences when compared to other RPA vendors.

Positive

I have not worked with other solutions at an enterprise level. I have looked at them just to understand how they work and to see if they could serve my purposes better than UiPath.

The on-premises setup takes some time because we have to implement Orchestrator among other things. Generally, it's very fast. Sometimes there are issues, things like application and environment access, but they're usually more related to the customer that I'm working with. Overall, if everything is good to go, installation and configuration can be done in a day.

I worked with a national company on an on-premises solution and it took four hours to install Orchestrator, and one to two hours more to implement UiPath Studio and the UiPath robot. It was really straightforward with no configuration errors. Using the right versions of Windows Server and the virtual machines, the ones that UiPath recommends, helps everything go smoothly.

When working with a customer that is just starting to use RPA, I usually pick all the recommendations for installation and configuration from the UiPath vendor website. I then add some extra tips on configuring the Windows Server and ask the customer to provide the environments. That gives me access to everything that I need. 

There can always be additional details to deal with, but they are usually errors to do with infrastructure, permissions, or proxy configuration on the customer's side. These are usually things that they did not mention, and then we have to reconfigure things. But if I don't know how to handle them I can usually find a UiPath tutorial where they teach you how. UiPath always provides the knowledge that I need to implement the solution.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation. When dealing with a customer's first RPA implementation, and they are comparing UiPath with other vendors, the downside of UiPath is always the price because it's the most expensive platform. However, it is the fastest and most reliable. The community is great. The support is great. So it definitely speeds up the digital transformation process a lot.

When customers are comparing tools, we focus on the strong points of UiPath. For example, it's the least expensive over the long term because it's very reliable, and we are not going to spend too much time on the development. The development is always faster when compared to other tools.

If customers are only looking at the initial price for implementing RPA, they may go with other vendors. I have seen this happen a couple of times. When this is the case we will usually want to use the least expensive license possible from UiPath. For example, when a company has only one unattended robot, they will try to put multiple processes on the same robot before jumping to buy another robot and expanding the overall architecture.

Some things can be done with open-source tools, but they lack governance when implementing automation on a large scale. When we talk about scaling the solution, a solution like UiPath is the clearest choice.

Free automation tools are not going to be as easy to deploy and scale as UiPath.

When we are developing RPA projects for digital transformation, we want to provide a solution that is reliable and fast. UiPath helps on both of those counts. It enables us to implement automation in a fast, secure, and reliable way.

I have worked on some projects with UiPath Automation Cloud, but mostly using the same tools as usual. I didn't take too much advantage of what the cloud provides, compared to other projects, but it's easier to manage if a company needs to start from scratch. With Automation Cloud you don't have as much to maintain, such as handling an on-premises server. It also definitely helps for keeping things updated.

With everything centralized on Automation Cloud, it's very easy when it comes to a higher level of governance. For example, if I want to manage the licensing between Orchestrators, and create different tenants and manage the access between those tenants, that is all very easy to do. UiPath gives you a very clean interface.

A SaaS solution helps a lot when working on projects for many of our customers because they do not have any RPA infrastructure. They are often starting their first project and a SaaS solution has everything centralized. They can just buy one license for attended or unattended robots and start from there. It's great for the customers because they only need to worry about a virtual machine in their environment. We create a minimum viable product more efficiently because we don't have to worry about the configuration of their own Orchestrator and the like.

Also, when they want to scale, Automation Cloud will be much easier.

I keep myself updated on the news from UiPath and they are starting to implement serverless robots on the cloud. I don't know if this is already available in the Enterprise version, but when it comes out, companies do want to implement it because they won't even need to worry about an on-premises virtual machine. Everything will be in the cloud.

I started my learning about UiPath from the Academy. It's very good and very insightful, and the questions and exercises are everything that you need to learn how to automate using UiPath Studio or any other tool.

The Academy is a must for starting with RPA using UiPath. There are some other courses online in other learning platforms, but UiPath already provides everything that you need to start an RPA career. Not only can you learn the developer's role, but also the role of a business analyst and solution architect. It gives you an understanding of all the steps involved in creating and managing automations.

The certification is also very important. At the time I did the certification, it was free. It's very valuable for someone starting out who wants to get an RPA job.

One of the projects we have been working on is for a medical company. It includes fetching medical records from the company's web-based portal. These records have to be pasted into Excel and consolidated. We then send them back to the client via email. We use Orchestrator to schedule the process to run every day at three intervals. It is running as an unattended bot.

We have also used it for another company to help with their employee onboarding process.

If we had to build code from scratch in UiPath, we would have to configure proper exception handling and log creation. We would also have to connect it to Orchestrator queues. But with the predefined REFramework (Enhanced Robotic Enterprise Framework) template, those requirements have been built already. All we have to do is invoke our code in one of the four states: Init, Get Transaction, Process Transaction, and End Process. Because it is connected to Orchestrator's queues, we can then run the process.

We have also been able to develop our code based on UiPath's security and compliance credentials. UiPath supports confidentiality. Until now, we have never faced a security problem. It is the most secure RPA tool.

Another benefit is that UiPath automation saves our clients time. During our requirements gathering, one client told us that the process they wanted to be automated takes around 15 to 30 minutes to complete when done manually. As a result of the solution we implemented using UiPath, it is now completed within two minutes.

There are two features that I find to be the most valuable in UiPath. 

One is Orchestrator because it allows us to manage the bots and processes. For example, we can monitor unattended bots' run history and their logs. We can also modify our code based on screenshots by logging the screenshots and then viewing the logs in an Orchestrator job. That helps us trace errors and rectify them.

The second valuable feature is REFramework which is a pre-defined template built with proper exception handling and logging activities. Those aspects help developers to develop code properly.

In addition, I have implemented UiPath with ABBYY FlexiCapture for some projects, and that has been very helpful for successfully completing those projects and providing a positive impact for our customers. It makes it very easy to extract data from a PDF and then build code to process it in UiPath. The integration of ABBYY FlexiCapture with UiPath is a very good feature.

When it comes to REFramework, we need more training videos and tutorial documents for beginners. 

And while there are a lot of videos to learn about basic activities in UiPath, we need more documents and key points on how to connect third-party connectors. That would be very helpful for beginners and for quick implementation.

I've been working in UiPath for almost two years. I use it daily.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

The scalability is also excellent.

Sometimes technical support will get stuck on how to execute further, but we raise our queries in the UiPath Community Forum. There are so many RPA developers there and we get quick replies from them. We're able to build solutions based on their information. The forums are very useful for us.

Positive

I used to use Blue Prism.

I have seen a lot of return on investment with UiPath because it enables quicker implementation of automations.

When I compared the basics between Blue Prism and UiPath, I felt UiPath was much better.

With Blue Prism it takes a lot of time to build code and workflows. For example, to fetch data from Excel within UiPath only one activity is needed, called Read Range. But Blue Prism requires use of three activities to do the same thing. First, I have to open the Excel instance, then open the worksheet, and then fetch the data from the worksheet. Using UiPath means quicker implementations. 

And there are a lot more features in UiPath when compared to Blue Prism, and I haven't seen any disadvantages of UiPath. Using it, there is a solution for every process. There is no such thing as a process that cannot be done in UiPath. UiPath is the best solution for RPA and for our customers.

UiPath doesn't require any maintenance.

We are able to build workflows very quickly and it doesn't take that much coding knowledge to learn and understand UiPath. Beginners are able to learn it quickly and get into the businesses.

Choose UiPath. It is more helpful than any other tool for implementing solutions quickly and creating customer satisfaction. Based on my experience, UiPath is the best tool for automating RPA projects and repetitive processes.

I work for a banking company. We use UiPath for tracing and collecting customer's credit information.

We also use it to deploy a bot when clients have specific requests for changes to their information or accounts. We're able to change their service via these requests. We can also remove some processes of manual intervention.

We've deployed bots across various processes. We have been able to remove human intervention for multiple processes and have seen a general improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness.

We used to handle dashboards manually. Now we've turned customers into kind of specialists in that, whenever they want to change something, such as adding debit, or opening/closing accounts, changing addresses, et cetera, they can handle it. They no longer have to push that request through us and have us intervene. They can do it themselves using the bots. 

Previously, nobody could automate the process. The design and implementation allowed clients to handle their own data, for example, for transfers and items like that. We were able to digitize entirely from end to end. Now, the customer doesn't have to come to the bank and they don't need a pen and paper. They just have to log on and fill out the details of their request. Being able to share this new data is important. If there are manual aspects, we can now handle them for the customer. We don't have to have them worry about doing tasks manually.

We can use browsers like Internet Explorer for our automation. However, we've been able to use Excel as well with just a few hiccups in the beginning. UiPath really helped us with this change by disabling some elements at the managerial level. It was a big learning experience for us.

We are able to use codes to do a lot of checking to see that we are getting enough data and that we are able to filter it correctly.

The ease of building a process is pretty good and simplifies things. Normally it takes three to four hours to complete a process. That includes everything, including generating reports and sending the data. There are, of course, multiple steps involved in the process. We've gotten that down to about six minutes. We're able to better focus the work and, at the same time, we're able to use a lot of bots to get things done. 

We can scale the solution well. We've already deployed four more bots for various processes. We're actually able to have good control of each bot. We're able to put things into a proper standard format and then send the information where it needs to go without having to handle the process manually. It would go so much slower without the bots in place without having to go back to the customer. There's no longer a needs to do anything manually here. There was a concern that customers would not be able to manage the process that's automated by the bots, however, in the end, everything was clear and it was easily handled. 

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with process analysis, then robot building, and finally monitoring automation. We're involved from the very beginning to design the process from step one. We're able to test everything out before moving to production and that allows us to make sure everything works. End-to-end coverage is first and foremost. The visibility we have is really powerful. 

We were able to deploy in parts, as we didn't have global production. At first, we didn't know how to manage everything. Once we went live, however, we were able to monitor it all. We could send reports to show what was happening, and if there were any concerns, we could go and directly look at those areas.

The solution helped to minimize our on-premises footprint. I always look for capabilities to deploy from the cloud. It changes as the customer needs to decide how to ultimately deploy. However, the cloud is able to handle anything an on-prem option would. We are able to handle the entire volume using one cloud. Our bots are able to be on the cloud and online. 

Attended automation has helped to scale RPA benefits in our organization by automating department roles and specific processes that require human/robot collaboration. Previously, we were concerned with data loss and not being able to attend to the browser. We were not able to do even the simpler stuff.

We were able to upgrade to an updated version, from 19.4 to 20.4 which had some more UI and automation. We were able to upscale our entire quota. We're able to do workarounds if we need to.

We can speed up our automation processes and automate faster with UiPath.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership by taking care of items such as infrastructure maintenance and updates.

The solution speeds up the cost of digital transformation.

The solution has reduced human error. We've been able to reduce errors and have gotten more quality data instead of just more data. That way, if there is a mistake or something goes wrong, we can check the error against the quality data and resolve issues more effectively.

It has also freed up our employee's time. They can better deliver on big and innovative processes. We used to handle a lot of high volume tasks at the end of the month mostly and that's since tapered off. We'll have to see at the end of this month how much time savings we've accumulated. 

Our employees can now focus on more high-value work. Employee satisfaction is high as well. In a bank, we do have a high volume of transactions every month, and previously, each would have to be checked and verified and balanced by someone manually - even if most would be dismissed as canceled transactions, et cetera. With automation, our employees no longer have to look at everything themselves. They can be wiser about what interventions they have to make every month.

Overall, the solution has reduced the cost of our automation operations. As a developer, I cannot speak to exact amounts, however, as that's handled more by project managers. 

So far, the solution has saved the company costs. We're very customer-focused in our organization. Deploying these kinds of innovative solutions allows us to better serve while offering our customers better services as well. It's become like their personal service manager. We've done this without ballooning costs. 

While the solution speeds up the cost of digital transformation, doing so requires expensive or complex application upgrades or IT app support. You will need IT. That said, I haven't had a chance to explore mine in any detail.

There need to be more warnings for when there are issues within the automation especially when it comes to exceptions. We're not easily made aware of problems. The sooner we understand what the exception is, the sooner we can adjust things.

I've been using the solution going on 25 years now.

For the most part, the solution is stable. We did encounter one problem when we were testing. Apart from that, we did not encounter any issues. 

The solution has helped us to scale. For example, if we have no idea from where to start, but we know the process test and know the application is involved, we're able to start building. We can go and test and try out options without having to put anything into production right away, so we can refine and validate the data.

The solution itself is highly scalable. We have three worker bots running at the same time. Users, however, can scale it up however they want to.

I'm not sure if the company has any plans to increase usage or put more bots into production.

We have a team that lets us know if there are any changes coming up in relation to the infrastructure. If there are any changes that will affect the bots, it will not be done suddenly. We'll be able to ensure nothing is overly affected. 

In terms of technical support, if something is not working as it should, they do need to review it. They do help us with technical validation.

We did not use a different solution before we adopted UiPath.

The initial setup was complex to a certain degree. The documentation was unclear. In the beginning, we weren't really comfortable with the approach or the process. 

There were two types of processes happening at once during the deployment. We did each process twice, and each took two or three hours, so it was about one day to get everything going for each deployment, and then we did a final run-though. Likely, in total, it took us about 12 days or so. 

We tend to have a specific process that we go through for every implementation we do. We'll go through how many bots are needed and what to do. We also do testing for all types of situations. We have a process designer who is involved and assists with the setup.

In terms of maintenance, we don't need anyone to run the operation. We have three to five people that after a month of production, have a good enough understanding to handle any outstanding tasks, whatever they may be. If there are issues, such as, for example, if Internet Explorer is not working, they are able to troubleshoot and manage the solution.

We did not use an integrator or installer to assist in the deployment process.

We have seen an ROI.

I always work to design my solution in such a way that is the most cost-effective.

You do need to pay the full license cost in order to use UiPath, so you need to be strategic to get the most out of it.

Our company handles costs internally as we do not directly deal with a vendor.

We did evaluate other options for data capture before we chose UiPath.

We are customers and end-users.

At this time, we do not use the AI functionality within UiPath. Our solution is not impacted by anything generating artificial intelligence.

The automation speeds up the time to value and we see very quickly how much the solution is able to positively affect the business aspects. It's been really helpful for us overall. The processes have been profitable. 

I'd advise users to really focus on their input and output size. You'll be able to validate your data. It will help you transform your processes. You just need to figure out where you want to simplify and where you want to maximize value.

We've learned how to standardize processes. We've realized how important it is to always try to be very clear when creating automation.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Earlier, there was no integration of PagerDuty. In any process, we had been working with many stakeholders and many other clients, however, sometimes if any process needed to be done at a particular time, for example, 8:00 AM in the morning, and was not running at that time, we would get a failure message. Now, we instantly get an alert on our phone, or we get an alert on Teams or Slack. This UiPath integration, with all the features, is very beneficial as it is keeping us up to date and on schedule. If there are any failures the production support team can know and handle them immediately.

All the features, all the packages, everything, have been great. All of the artificial intelligence which we are getting is super-useful, as are all the needed updates.

All the features are valuable as, much like any application, it cannot work without just one feature. For example, we have PDF automation, we have Excel automation, Citrix, SAP, and we have SharePoint automation - which makes it so that we can automate anything. All the features combined allow us to work on multiple projects or one specific project. 

The ease of building automation using this solution is good. I really enjoy the flexibility. It's also very easy. We do need a few coding skills with languages like C# or Power Automate. However, it's got a good UI, with drag and drop functionality. That makes it easy compared to other tools, like Prism automation. UiPath is much better and it's highly recommended.

Scaling automation without worrying about the infrastructure was easy. I simply did some googling and looked to see which automation tools were out there and which was the leader. There were multiple training portals - including UiPath Academy, where I was able to pull all of these tutorials and insights. There's also a free forum where queries are answered. It made everything quite easy. 

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis, and robot building. This end-to-end coverage is important to me as we follow an agile methodology. We have an RPA development life cycle. This product gives us all the tools and everything we need. The requirement gathering and document preparation come as standard models. We have UiPath Studio for testing and UiPath test features for maintenance. We have the Orchestrator where we can maintain everything as well. We can see where things are working or not. In fact, we have integration with PagerDuty that gives alerts if something is failing or not working. It's really important that UiPath has integrated across all the life cycles, and that all the phases are working properly.

UiPath has helped to minimize our on-premises footprint, which has been very important to me. It's very important due to the fact that we can build a robust and scalable solution for an enterprise and have security in UiPath. It's very important that customer satisfaction is there, no matter what we are developing. It's very important to our organization.

It's a very fast solution. It can provide a result or automation to a business process within seconds. If we have an API, we can integrate EPS as well instead of using the UI. Basically, we can get any solution we need within seconds. It's very fast.

I have noticed that the solution reduces the cost of digital transformation as we are saving on manual hours. It's reducing them. We don't have to hire more people to do these manual jobs, which has helped us reduce the cost.

We did require application upgrades and IT application support. We wanted to update and get all the latest features that UiPath often releases. I've seen every month or every year we get all of these new packages. It's better to include the latest version to get all the latest features.

With UiPath, we have reduced human error. Humans are prone to making errors that they can make at any time. The bot does not. It's continuously given proper feedback. The lack of human errors has affected business a lot. The bot allows for complete confidence that perfect work is being done. It has also freed up employee time. We've saved thousands of hours. We have ten processes that are running in production. Up to this point, with those running, we have saved up to 1,918 hours from the automation. On top of that, employees can now focus on higher-value work. It has improved work satisfaction. There is more self-motivation that boosts the work, which we are doing.

The solution has reduced costs overall via automation. However, I cannot speak to exact cost savings. As a whole, it's saved our organization money.

Right now, we don't have many use cases in the field of NLP, natural language processing, or artificial intelligence. There are not many tutorials or any videos or enough insights shared by the UiPath Academy. If we could get more insights, that would be great.

With artificial intelligence or natural language processing, we need to get in touch with the servers, however, we cannot do it without getting a proper license. Maybe a mode of artificial intelligence and natural language processing should be included without needing a different license.

I've been using the solution for the past three years. I am currently working in Rackspace Technology. It's been two years looking at it now and one year in my previous organization, which was essential.

The solution is very stable. 

It is scalable. So far it's not been getting into trouble, and we haven't tested the boundaries, however, it's scalable.

I've been using the solution for the past three years myself. We also have a developer and some bigger production staff. There might be a few people who use it here and there. 

It's been extensively used in our organization. We are getting in touch with many internal clients, internal business units, and getting more projects. We are in the process of expanding it. Right now, we have five to 10 business units, such as accounting, et cetera, and we are trying to expand further out to other departments. 

I've never used UiPath technical support.

I did not previously use a different solution. 

The initial setup was easy. We basically had to install UiPath Studio and the tool, as well as the orchestrator. It was quite straightforward and easy.

The deployment process was just a couple of minutes. It was maybe five minutes. Not more than that.

We didn't have much of an implementation strategy beyond setting it up and working with a model via the deployment team. 

We handled the implementation ourselves. 

While I have noted an ROI, I cannot share specific data points.

I don't know much about the buying, the pricing, and other cost-related details. 

I did evaluate other options, such as Automation Anywhere, however, I have found that UiPath has a better interface and all the activities can be seen more visibly on the screen.

We are just a customer. 

At this time, we have not automated departments or role-specific processes that require human-robot collaboration. Mostly, we have unattended automation such as NOMA inclusion. We do not use the AI functionality in our automation process just yet and we do not use the solution's automation cloud offering. We also have not used the UiPath apps feature.

I would advise users considering the solution to try it once. The community edition is free. You can explore and download the community edition and take note of all the features which UiPath offers. If it suits the company, I would advise users to go contact the UiPath technical team or support team and get more information on how to implement UiPath.

The more you explore, the more you'll learn. It's not just the straightforward drag and drop functionality. Many people say that UiPath is just for a person with no technical knowledge. However, the more knowledge you have of the technical side, with an understanding of languages like Java, Python, C#, the more you'll excel as it's based on a .NET framework. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

I'm working on a supply chain management project, where some of the distributors are eligible for some of their stock to be returned. The beginning of this stock rotation, and the interactions, are through email. It was previously done by representatives, but we are now automating that process so that we interact with the distributors using email. Responses are sent based on the validations that the bot performs. It's an end-to-end process, all automated using the UiPath.

The project I'm working on creates a lot of availability for employees to concentrate on other activities. Human interaction is reduced. Instead of all the management representatives interacting with front-end people, UiPath is interacting through the API. It has increased the time available to our associates who were working on that particular process. If 10 people were working on a particular process, that number has been reduced to three or four, and the other people have been able to concentrate on something else. The stock rotation process itself would usually take a month in a particular region, but that has been reduced to less than 15 days.

We have also automated a few processes that have human and bot interaction, using UiPath Action Center. When there is human interaction in a particular process, it takes a lot of time. But when we integrated a process with the bot through Action Center, the time needed for the human interaction was reduced. It gives time back to the person who would be doing repetitive work. For example, if a value is different from what the bot is expecting, an Action Center task will be triggered and the human will submit the input that is needed. The rest of the process will then be taken care of by the bot. So the time spent on a particular validation is reduced.

Also, if you compare the situation from a couple of years back, when I started using UiPath, and the present, there has been a lot of change in the way UiPath comes up with new products when it comes to document validation, such as Document Understanding. That does speed up the digital transformation process, and I haven't seen any requirements for additional infrastructure as a condition for benefiting from that transformation process.

UiPath has also helped to reduce human error, and that reduces the time that a particular process takes to run.

For beginners, UiPath is a very low-code or no-code experience. They can get started with StudioX. The best place to learn the solution is the UiPath Academy. If they come across any hurdles, the forum is an excellent place to post them and get answers. As a community, UiPath is very encouraging for newcomers. People with no coding experience can automate processes.

Initially, because I was working with Automation Anywhere, the switch was a little bit overwhelming. There are comparatively more Activities in UiPath. The scope is very large; you can automate large processes. But eventually, I have come to feel that building automation is easier in UiPath than with Automation Anywhere.

Also, in my experience using UiPath automation, we have not had to make any changes to infrastructure. It has really been a seamless interaction.

We don't use the UiPath Apps feature yet. I did a PoC on it and it looks like a wonderful product. But when we are using Action Center with Apps, the Action Center stage is built in Orchestrator, but the same field is not built in the Apps. We have to work around that particular process, to make Action Center and Apps work together. Action Center waits for a particular input when a particular task is triggered. This stage is not built in Apps. UiPath Apps should be stepped up in terms of its functionality and integration with other UiPath products.

I have been using UiPath for almost three years.

I did come across an issue very recently where, when I had to update the version of the Activity package I used for a particular deployment, the Data Table Activity, it did not list the way it had been listed. I raised a question in the forum, but there was no clear answer. Apart from that, I haven't seen any other instability with UiPath.

UiPath is scalable. We have deployed bots across many regions. There was no limit in that respect. I haven't seen any issue; the scalability is good.

I work in the automation center of excellence in our company. There are 50 to 60 teammates there, working on UiPath and Automation Anywhere. In UiPath, they work on the automation of SAP. In addition to my work on supply chain automation, there are a couple of projects dealing with our customers' needs. Our organization builds products that are generic and we then customize them to meet those customer needs. There are also some projects where Excel activity is the focus. And we recently started using Document Understanding in a PoC. We generally have two or three developers working on deployment, along with one DevOps person. Not many people are required for deployment.

I haven't contacted UiPath tech support, other than posting that Data Table Activity question in the forum.

I was working with Automation Anywhere for a year or so, but because of the requirements of our company, I had to switch to UiPath. The switch happened because a customer we work for deploys UiPath.

I have been able to learn things like interaction with multiple enterprise systems, including OBI, using API calls. Unlike other automation applications I have used, implementing a process using UiPath is very easy.

In terms of end-to-end automation, there are products that are useful for identifying processes for automation. But for the process I'm working on right now, we did not use UiPath to implement end-to-end automation. Identifying the process for automation was done separately. Only building the bot was done in the UiPath. The process is not end-to-end, except for the bot development. When I think of "end-to-end," it includes identification of the process for automation. From there, you need to build up the process, the documentation, et cetera. End-to-end is important, as it means you aren't switching between multiple tools.

I am an RPA developer and I am using UiPath to create both attended and unattended bots.

I develop bots that run doing overnight tasks and we can check the results in the morning.

UiPath allows us to scale without having to worry about the infrastructure. It is simple to scale any of the automations that you develop. 

UiPath makes it easy to build automations. It is very user-friendly and they provide all of the courses in the UiPath Academy. We can learn starting with the basics, and it is really simple. One person needs between two weeks and one month to learn it.

This solution provides us with the ability to do end-to-end automation, starting with the discovery phase and process mining. After that, we move to the building page where we have Studio X, and then we can deploy the automation on the cloud.

UiPath has helped us to scale RPA benefits by automating the backup of all of the projects running in the organization. This bot runs every night and reduces our workload for one employee by eight hours, or one day each week. 

UiPath handles all of the infrastructure updates and maintenance, which is really good.

The cloud offering has helped us to see time to value quicker. It has helped us in many ways, including with the automation of repeated tasks. One example is that I created a bot for myself that is responsible for filtering all of the spam emails from my inbox on a daily basis, and then removing them. The first step is the identification and the second step is removing them. This saves me time.

The automation cloud has helped us to reduce the total cost of ownership because we can manage everything through Orchestrator.

UiPath has definitely reduced the percentage of human errors that we have in our processes. In our system, all of the bots follow our best practices so there is a very small chance of error. The reduction in error rate depends on the process. For example, the OCR is not very accurate so the errors are higher but if the process involves an API or SQL queries then it is very good.

This product has helped to reduce the cost of our automation operations. There is more of an upfront cost but it is one-time, and then we start saving.

The best feature is the good community support that is provided in the UiPath forum.

I like that it is a cloud version and runs on Citrix. I used the cloud offering to deploy my bots and manage my Orchestrators.

It would be very helpful for us if they provided more business use cases and helped us to learn them.

We have been using UiPath for almost two years.

There are times when you need to shut down the automation and restart it. Other than that, it is very stable.

I am the only one developing the bots but I am currently training some other people who are just learning it.

To this point, we have not had to scale any of our projects. Our usage of it depends on the project and where we can use automation.

When other features and updates are released, we normally visit the forum to help understand them. I have never used technical support.

I have also tried using Automation Anywhere.

Each solution has different types of bots that are available. One of the differences is that with UiPath, you have Orchestrator to help you manage them.

Generally speaking, UiPath is easier to understand.

The initial setup is not complex. It is easy to deploy and the actual setup of UiPath is not very difficult. It is a matter of downloading the Studio and creating an account in the Orchestrator. Then, you can start working.

My IT team was responsible for the initial setup. Only one person was needed to complete it.

I take care of all of the maintenance.

I am using the Community Edition and am not familiar with the cost of the paid editions.

We do not yet use the AI functionality but I know that it is there.

I have watched some videos on the UiPath apps feature, which lets us create automations in a low-code/no-code fashion. We have not used it yet but this is something that we'll be exploring in the future.

The biggest lesson that I learned from using this solution is that they have a very good community forum, where you can share ideas and learn from other RPA developers.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to start by taking the fundamental UiPath courses from the UiPath Academy. This will help to understand RPA and UiPath.

In summary, this is a good product and I'm quite satisfied with all of the functionality that it provides.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.