UiPath Reviews

• Financial domain
• Excel automation
• SAP automation
• Citrix automation
• Usage of Orchestrator queues
• RE framework
• Automating password resets
• Security and governance
• Highly elastic scalability
• Work queues
• Rules-based exception handling
• Large group deployment
• Rapid development support
• Centralized repository for version control
• Execution logs and credentials.

• We have a lot of processes to be automated. UiPath helped us to be cost effective and time effective.
• UiPath provides us with high speed in case of implementation.
• Implementation speed which helps how fast can you automate
• Reusability and extensibility which is used to build modular automation and reuse at the workflow level, plus it extends UiPath's functionality via custom activities or various integration.

• Citrix recorder
• UI Explorer
• I used to connect using remote desktop and automated it using image automation. 
• The cloud deployment option is particularly attractive to some customers for its flexibility and scalability, along with customary thin client advantages. 

Those customers should determine if the RA provider offers a cloud service that scales automatically. The customer should go beyond that minimum and look for a provider whose architecture provides a proven integration track record with Citrix (including Xen) and other virtualization technologies, enterprise applications such as SAP (GUI and web), Oracle, Siebel, PeopleSoft, Salesforce.com.

Sometimes when working with operation leads, it’s hard to get them to focus on the concept, and also believe in the concept. For approval, it should run through all of your company’s major departments, ranging from investor groups to operation floor leads to finance to management. Processes that will be affected by the RPA should all be consulted as well, and all departments should be considered in the RPA implementation process.

I'm working in a consulting company as an RPA developer. We have some projects with clients connected with automations. That is my primary case of using this solution daily. 

We help our clients to improve their businesses, reduce costs, for example, hiring new people to automate repetitive work, to be able to run a process when the need arises 24/7. 

The most valuable features for me in UiPath is the ability to use more than one programming language. We can, of course, drag and drop activities, but it's also possible to run our own code/macro. The second thing which I like the most is the recording ability, all steps which we want to automate can be recorded and directly transferred as a sequence into UiPath.

• I think it would be good to add more activities regarding operations on data tables. 
• The product definitely should be improved in the case of throwing more accurate description of exceptions.

Good in my opinion, we have a lot of possibilities, so it's up to us what we decided to use. We can use state machine which works perfectly or in some small processes choose sequence.

Very good, a very well-developed UiPath forum having a lot of helpful guys. The maximum waiting time for a response is around two days.

I use both tools for automation: Blue Prism and UiPath. The current project runs in UiPath.

I have no idea about pricing, cost, and license.

My advice for future UiPath users is to get familiarized with all documents and online courses provided by UiPath because it's very valuable knowledge.

We are using UiPath in our finance and accounting area but we do see it as a tool that we can use across the whole of the business.

We're really in the early days of what we're doing but even with the first robotized process, what we've seen is that it's given us the opportunity to really assess the process, understand where the waste is so that we could eradicate that, simplify the process and then really engage with the operations people to build a robust, streamlined process. And then the automation of course, has got rid of the mundane transactional work and given the people a much more fulfilling part of the process overall.

We've used a number of automation technologies previous, I mean we are a technology company so we understand automation and we've used a lot of BPMS tools in the past, but this has just given us something that we didn't have, and I think that's the advantage we're seeing from UiPath.

I think it's the relative ease of use. It's really bridging that gap between the human interface with the technology that we're using and giving us an automation advantage that you just couldn't get from any other type of solution.

I think it's a little bit early to say at the moment, I think UiPath are ahead of us in our thinking at the moment, maybe in a year's time we might have areas where we see gaps but at the moment, everything we need I think is there, out of the box.

I think like any tool, like any software technology, you have to follow the recommended framework and use proper coding standards so it's easy to use, but I think to scale up and make it robust in a scaled environment, you have to have rigor, you have to have a solid operating model in place. But we've done that and yeah, I think it's a very stable product.

Before we entered into this, we did some benchmarking and we looked at best practices and we're seeing companies that are scaling significantly using this technology. We believe we can scale to a significant level, and again, the key thing is to put that operating model in the infrastructure in place to give you that solid foundation.

I would say it's excellent to be honest with you, getting our first robot up and running we had some pitfalls as you would expect in the early days, but we picked up the phone, we got hold of UiPath, they sent people both in physical and remote support forms. And it was second to none, it was really effective and we got up and running very quickly as a result.

I think setting up the software is very easy to do. It is really about spending the time up front to think about your operating model and think about how you're going look at the processes, how you're going to simplify them and then how you're going to robotize them. So you could get up and running with a robotized process very quickly, but if you want to do it on scale, you do need to take some time to think about how you're going to scale that.

we did use a partner, I won't name who that was. We worked with them. It was good to have that experience to bring somebody in who'd seen it in other companies and could help to give us that kickstart. We do want to be self-sufficient, we do want to build our own competence but I think everybody needs that boost in the beginning.

I think the first thing is that I always see these things a starting point, it isn't cost, per se, it's really about the improvement to the process, the quality, the service and overall value that you can deliver to the customer. But what's great is that coming out of that, you do get a cost advantage and obviously unattended robots give us a significant cost advantage, but even attended robots, you're seeing very much an ROI which is in the two times plus level.

If we look at ROI, if we look at our first robot, that's the only one we've got fully engaged and in production, it's probably going to give us an ROI in about one, maximum, two months.

It's been very quick to get up and running and it's saved significant amount of time. We're basically only talking about initially one FTE, when we scale it up to the rest, globally it's going to be be three FTEs. Within one to two months, it's going to giving us a return on investment and we've now got a pipeline and a backlog of robotized processes which we expect to be giving us ROI of less than three months.

It is always difficult to say exactly the percentage, but it's certainly got rid of human errors. I think one of the most important things is that we're 100% certain that the processes run right, so we know that day, that time that the processes run correctly, or if not where the errors were.

The thing with human errors, even if they're infrequent, you don't often know until much later on that the error occurred, so it's that certainly of knowing when you've got 100% accuracy and when you've not, you can very quickly rectify that. So I think that's probably the biggest impact we've seen. So far, over 80% of the lead time and process time has been reduced.

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.

Our primary use cases are for invoice processing and some legal intake use cases.

The benefits we see from UiPath are always time savings. I've never seen another benefit. It's always that people don't have to do manual tasks anymore.

The automation cloud offering helps to decrease UiPath's total cost of ownership, by taking care of things such as infrastructure, maintenance, and updates, if security isn't a big issue. 

With the cloud offering, you don't have as much control of where the data is and how it's protected versus the on-prem. If you're dealing with very sensitive information, you could introduce a compliance risk if you're using the cloud offering. But with the customers that we partner UiPath with, that's not an issue, so we use the cloud offering.

The screen automation features are the most valuable. There are some things, in an automation process that is complicated, that UiPath isn't very good at. And there are some things that are very repetitive and UiPath is good with it. For those repetitive aspects, it's obvious why it's valuable. It's replacing the amount of time that a human being would have to spend doing it.

We have seen that our clients have freed up time for their employees.

Our clients utilize AI functionality from UiPath. UiPath is really good at simple repetitive processes, but not as much at complex processes. The more complicated it gets, it breaks down because if it's less repetitive, it's less automatable.

AI functionality enabled our clients to automate more processes overall. It helped with end-to-end automation in the way that if you automate more processes, you save more time, and save more money for the company.

It is not very easy to build on automations. That's a problem with UiPath. I don't think it's very easy to build automation on top of it. 

Accessibility needs improvement. It would be easier to build on UiPath if they would have more employee-level users as opposed to consultants. Then that would increase the value of the product and the platform.

I have been using UiPath for two years. 

The stability is good. 

It's very scalable in our organization. The hardest thing is getting in and getting someone to build their first five automations and their first five robots in the first place. After that, it's very hard to rip out. Once you've already automated something and you've done all the in-depth work to set it up, it's pretty sticky.

There are around ten users and they're almost all solutions architects.

We've used Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere, but I think UiPath is the market leader right now.

Even though UiPath is hard to use, it's easier to use than Blue Prism. And it has more features than Automation Anywhere.

The initial setup is never straightforward. There are always bugs. It doesn't matter if it's UiPath or any other company, it's always complex. It's never easy the first time.

The implementation takes around three months. 

Ideally you don't want to take someone's job, but if you free up the time that someone was spending doing something, you don't have to pay them to do that anymore, or you can reinvest their time somewhere else.

It's expensive, but it saves a lot of money too.

My advice to someone implementing UiPath would be to hire someone technical to do it. It's not as easy to use as they say it is.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten. To get it to a perfect ten, it would need to be easier to use.