UiPath Reviews

My primary use case is automation. I worked in multiple companies with the same product on the same profile, and most of them were automation. The actual business use case would vary from company to company, and project to project as well.

One feature that I personally found valuable was the orchestrator. It is a pretty mature platform as of now, and it was three to four years back when I started to first use it. It has matured quite well. They had a major change a couple of years back. Our company transitioned from an older approach to a newer modern approach that they deployed. The orchestrator platform was very well-suited to the new approach - as was the development studio. It's really easy to use and intuitive. That has matured quite well as far as I can tell. These two are what I liked the most about the product.

UiPath’s ease of use and quick deployment times were great as the cloud orchestrator, which did not need much of a setup.

To build automation using UiPath is fairly simple. The studio is quite easy to use. Even now, with the community edition, it’s great. If we want to learn to start or try out something, we do not have to wait for licenses or anything else. That said, we can also get an enterprise trial. If we want to do something, learn something, even during our personal time, we can just download it. They also provide a free orchestrator version as well, so it becomes quite easy to learn and develop. 

The building, deployment, and manual deployment processes, for small-scale projects, are very easy. If we need to build something, we just publish it, and it generates the NuGet package. It's very easy to deploy there.

The materials and the training courses are all pretty well-structured to get started with.

UiPath Academy courses have assisted in the process of getting our team up to speed. The basics were there even when I started out. I was not initially an RPA developer. I was into server operations before this. The UiPath Academy training really helped a lot with the initial courses, where they give you a tour of the platform and each and every activity. For audiences who are not much into software development, these courses can guide them towards that. The building blocks got us up to speed. They have very good courses there.

Regarding the Academy, it is a great learning platform for basic tasks. However, for more complex information, I turn to UiPath Forum. Sometimes I need some Python or C# scripts or am building custom libraries there. That gets shifted onto different platforms like Stack Overflow. We Google other platforms as well for the other types of queries.

UiPath Forum is a pretty good place in terms of the user community. Most of the queries that are posted generally get answered. Sometimes, even for smaller issues, we do not go directly into UiPath support and we first try to resolve the issues via what we find in the UiPath Community. Overall, it’s a pretty good place to solve our issues, and the community as of now is pretty active.

We saved time in our IT department since we started to use this solution. UiPath handles infrastructure for the orchestrator and its maintenance. There's a pretty good amount of time saved as we had initially had a server on-prem deployment as well. However, it became cumbersome to deploy multiple databases and they have some Elasticsearch requirements and security updates that need to be regularly maintained and in sync with UiPath. Due to this infrastructure overhead, our time could be consumed maintaining everything. Without them handling the infrastructure, we'd be maintaining instead of building automations and deploying them. We realized that an automation cloud would be a better option which is why we switched.

UiPath reduced human error. That said, we do not track errors in the process. It's a good metric to track as well, however, we currently do not track it.

It reduced employees’ time on certain tasks. The main purpose of automation is to save us the number of hours that the project will take. There are many other parameters, however, the time saved is one of the big ones. 

A weakness with Academy is that, with the current updates that they have, the newer updates, the courses are not up to speed. Nowadays, Academy does not feel that intuitive and does not give sufficient information about the product to the customer.

In our current use cases, we do not need much user interaction. One shortcoming with UiPath Apps is that it cannot directly integrate with the orchestrator platform itself. For example, if we need to fetch any assets, values, or cue data from the orchestrator itself, it's basically a web platform. Even if we develop apps and want to do something based on that data, they do not have direct integration with the orchestrator. We need a separate bot, which will then interact with the orchestrator and then pass it back.

If we need ten to fifteen users who might simultaneously use apps, and we want to run a process for each of these users, then we might need fifteen licenses to do that. That is something that has been holding us back from using it, as it does not have direct orchestrator access. We need a separate bot to get the data to perform some actions.

Scaling and licensing need major improvement. I know that they have released something called Serverless Cloud Robots, where the bot machines do not need infrastructure. However, we do not generally want to run the bots or the data in the UiPath cloud as well. There are some hiccups that do happen when we run bots on another machine. That said, it might be a good feature and we can scale up and scale down more effectively.

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

The stability has been quite good for a couple of quarters now. We had some issues two or three quarters ago, where there was a downtime of around thirty minutes which impacted assessment. After that, for the last couple of quarters, we have not seen any issues regarding the platform itself. It is pretty stable.

The product allows scaling up, however, when we deploy and run the bot, the bot does not actually run on the orchestrator. The orchestrator is just a management platform. When we need to scale up bots, what we would need to do is spin up new virtual machines. We need those virtual machines in order to scale up. This, along with the licensing affects the ability to scale.

If someone does not have a license, it cannot scale up. When comparing it to something like AWS offers, or any other cloud service, where you can rapidly scale up and rapidly scale down based upon our demands, that is currently not possible with the UiPath. We do not get to easily scale up. We need to plan in advance as to when we run our automation, what time we need to offset the loads, and which automation gets priority at that time. That becomes a bit of an issue.

As of now, scaling is a bit cumbersome, whether we are scaling up or down, and the licensing also revolves around scaling.

We use both attended and unattended automation. In the case of attended automation, scaling is a bit tricky. We need to consider licenses. Very few need the same automation to run on one hundred machines. If we do, then we would need to find a way to manage these one hundred licenses as well. It again comes down to cost.

Our thought process is that whenever possible and where we need to scale, we try to avoid human interaction, and we try to convert our bad pieces into attended automation. If some automation requires a manual login due to regulatory compliance or maybe due to capture, what we do is have these login paths that we take in as unattended input. Then where it’s possible, we would run it as an unattended mode and maybe then pass on the output to the attended mode.

We have support from UiPath, however, I'm not sure what model we are on. 

The support is not as responsible as we would expect. It's not bad, but it's not good.

The response time, the overall solutions that they provide, and the workarounds are okay. It's a mix of everything. We've had somewhat of a mixed experience with them.

Neutral

UiPath handles infrastructure, maintenance, and updates for the Automation Cloud - the infrastructure being the orchestrator infrastructure. The robot infrastructure is handled by us.

I was involved in the initial deployment of UiPath in our organization's deployment process. The deployment process is pretty straightforward with automation cloud data, so we did not need to worry about that. The administration is pretty straightforward as well. They have all of these access models, folders, and groupings. It's very easy, even for a new user that needs access to a particular box to run. It's also easy to maintain.

In terms of deployment on the cloud, there is no overhead. The administration process is simple. Maybe it took us around two to three days of initial setup. Most of the time was spent brainstorming on how we would need to structure our use case. That was what took the majority of the time. Once we decided on that, it was pretty easy. It can be done in one day. The process is also ongoing as the requirements change and the roles change, and it always requires some sort of maintenance, taking out users, taking in new users, et cetera. However, that's pretty easy.

In terms of the deployment of individual bots, it is pretty easy. The manual deployment is also pretty simple. We deploy it from the studio. We get a bundle package and we upload it at the studio level as well as the orchestrator, and it's done. This is a straightforward model. We do have a CI/CD pipeline setup for enterprises where we avoid manual deployments. In that case, we do not use UiPath CI/CD. We do use Git and pipelines to push our packages directly to UiPath.

I can't speak to if there has been an ROI or not.

The licensing could be more flexible. They might have a different enterprise cost strategy for each of the licenses. The license is rigid in that you cannot generally scale up. To scale up, we have to have a license procured before we can run a bot there.

I am not involved in the comparison between Uipath and its competitors, such as Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, or any other platform.

We do not really have clients in healthcare, however, my previous company has mainly evolved into what I can say is a pharmaceutical supply chain. The company is an ordering platform for pharmaceuticals. I'm not sure whether I can consider that as a healthcare pharmaceutical or supply chain use case.

I had done some trial POCs around the UiPath Apps feature. We did some basic trials within our team, however, we do not have any end-users who actively use UiPath Apps.

We're still at an early stage in terms of using AI in our automation via UiPath. We tried out some POCs, and I'm also just getting training on that as well. We do not have any production use cases right now that go into full AI or ML.

In general, they have a good ecosystem of developers. It would be easier to set up and use it. However, if a new company has heavier workloads and needs scaling capability based on time, they’ll need to calculate their requirements. For example, if I process 1,000 to 2,000 transactions per day and I need ten robots to do this and it's fixed every day, then it's fine. That said, if I have varying workloads, where the workload is the last week of the month and the workload is very high, maybe I’ll need twenty or thirty bots to accommodate this workload, while, for the rest of the month, I’ll just need around five bots. That's twenty-five bots that I’ll need to purchase, with many idle most of the time. That is one issue that needs to be planned correctly during the initial stage. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We used to maintain a lot of Excel sheets for lead generation and other activities. UiPath helped us to automate those processes and clear our workloads so that we could focus on other main tasks.

It saved a lot of time on tasks that could be quite redundant. Fetching data and maintaining the machines and regularly updating them. That's the only thing that I was using it for. Using UiPath saved me about 10 to 12 hours on a weekly basis.

It allowed me to delegate mundane tasks to personal automations and to focus on more important tasks. By not having to do tasks that don't add value or skills, I could focus on tasks that were more important and that added value to my skills or targets. That brings much more satisfaction.

Also, the ability for employees to delegate mundane tasks to personal automations meant that we did not have to hire a person dedicated to doing those particular tasks. We could use the tool to do those tasks. It helped save those costs. On that front it helped in business operations.

UiPath was quite useful in terms of getting data from thousands of webpages online and arranging it in a predefined format. You can easily create robots and define operations in UiPath.

I come from a non-technical background. You need a little bit of technical knowledge to use it. We had a demonstration of how to use the platform, but it's easy to use. It helps in automating tasks which otherwise you would have to do manually.

The desktop Assistant tool provides a personal automation launchpad so that you can easily access and run automations. That's important because you don't have to go to someone every time you face a problem, or every time you have to run an automation process. It helps make you independent so that you can do your own tasks.

Other things I like about it include:

• Its dashboard is quite easy to use and you don’t need to have a programming background to understand it.
• You can record screens in Excel and download it from the cloud.
• You can also get quite a load of data from the web and use it for your processes without any manual effort.
  

For me, it was quite an effective tool because I hadn't used any automation tool previously. It was quite new for me and it took time to adjust to it and understand it. At times, some processes took longer with the tool, initially. But when you do them on a regular basis, you understand it better and it takes much less time. Setting up the systems could be difficult initially. It would be better if it were more user-friendly for non-technical users.

I used UiPath for less than one year.

It's quite stable and reliable. We had no issues.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup of UiPath in our organization, but I think it took less than a month to deploy it. It's also an ongoing process after deployment. There are a lot of things that need to be done.

About 10 to 15 people were using it in our organization. The users were mainly in IT where they were using it for central management and other automation purposes.

The fact that we didn't have to hire a resource specifically for doing certain tasks is how the ROI could be calculated. It also saved time for the existing employees.

There is a trial version available. You can go for the trial version first and then buy it and scale it per your needs. Try this tool. Go for it. It's definitely worth a try. If yours is a large organization, try the Community Edition first to get the hang of it. After that, move on to its Enterprise version.

What I learned from using UiPath is that there are tools available in the market that can essentially make your life a lot easier. You don't have to worry about doing certain tasks, maintaining them, continuously updating them. Their backups are always available, even if you lose something. They are always easily accessible on any device.

We use it for financial use cases: purchase-to-pay processes, reconciliation processes, vendor payment, and merchant payments. This is just in finance. Then, we have retail order processing, order creation, PO generation, delivery note generation, and all those things in retail. We even have banking processes as well, such as a payments portal. We use it in most of the fields.

We don't use cloud licenses. Most of our licenses are on-prem.

We use both attended and unattended automation in UiPath.

We are partnered with UiPath. Sometimes, UiPath refers customers to us, bringing us business. We also give them business.

We have a third-party order processing portal, which keeps on changing its UI very often and has elements that keep on shuffling between the metadata. What we had in this case was the script running was shuffling the elements, and we are disabled that thing. Then, we used the selector technology instead. Selector technology is very important for all our UI-based processes. We rely on it. 

We used the AI Fabric functionality in one of our projects. We had to categorize users' reviews based on the sentiment scores. Everything was already available, including the model. So, we just have to click on all those things from UiPath now.

The new features that they are adding in, these are very different from other RPA tools in the market:

• AI Fabric
• Integration with different data models
• You can do all the data processing, data mining, etc., in the back-end UiPath. 
• You don't need a separate tool for data mining or other cognitive abilities. You can do all the cognitive abilities in UiPath. 
• UiPath Apps, which they're bringing in just now, is a really good thing. It has a good user interface.

Most RPA tools do not directly have these features. Also, we don't have to rely on other tools in order to develop these things. We can directly develop and integrate them with UiPath on one platform. So, we don't have to struggle within multiple platforms.

UiPath Apps is available only on Community. So, this was a best case scenario for us. It was pretty good. The only thing is that it has to be more advanced. Now, it is very basic. I would like more integration with the UI elements. It should be more user-friendly, especially if we go for any other application development. For example, in other UI development platforms, you can easily drag and drop to develop in a UI. However, it is a very initial phase for UiPath Apps, and maybe in the future, they might improve this.

We have used the Picture in Picture functionality for a few attended automations, where the user is monitoring or we are installing a new interface. Sometimes, in my experience, Picture In Picture is a bit buggy. It takes over your control, then the controls get mixed. That is one of few issues that I have found. Other than that, Picture In Picture works pretty well.

I had an instance when UiPath crashed on my computer. Then, the code that I was working on also crashed. This was a very crucial process for us, but we apparently didn't have a backup. UiPath also didn't have any way to recover that code. This was something which I found very strange, because ideally the source company should have a mainframe where they can recover a code. Or, if I give them a corrupted damage file, then they could easily recover that code. 

The stability is pretty good when we follow the best practices, i.e., whatever is in the REFramework. 

Scalability is something that we are still figuring out. RPA is something which we cannot do for everything, because there is a small gap between profit and the cost.

The support has been pretty good so far. The response time could improve, then it would be much better. However, once we get a ticket assigned to a technical person, then it is pretty straightforward. They are very fast, know their job, and know how to resolve the issue.

The on-prem setup is straightforward. There is very detailed documentation. We always get support from UiPath, so it is not difficult. I have never faced any issues, but I have only deployed on a small scale.

The timeline of the project depends on the project's complexity. Usually, the due diligence and everything else takes about two or three weeks. Then, the design takes another one or two weeks before we start with the development, depending on the inputs.

I get involved with small client setups.

There is a client-facing team of around 25 people who do due diligence and design work. There is also our back-end/technical delivery team, which includes mostly developers, a product project manager, project owner, and developer lead, who are there mostly for their technical abilities, not for their design abilities. 

The price of Orchestrator is pretty high in general as well as compared to other solutions, because Automation Anywhere does not charge for its Control Room.

We can develop our own packages and integrate them, which is pretty good. Other tools don't have that.

There are a lot of cons with Automation Anywhere, which we are using. They deployed a new version, 2019, which is very buggy, and they are still working on that. I don't know how or why they released it to the public. They did so much testing, but it is still buggy.

Power Automate (previously Softomotive) needs to improve on its UI. The ease of use is not there with this solution.

Go for it. It is a pretty good tool, which is straightforward and easy to use. They have training in place. Even if you are new to it, you can go ahead and learn to do it. 

They are bringing in new things. You can automate, integrate, and test things. It is even used for mobile testing. It is pretty good in that case. For most of people's use cases, UiPath will suffice for their use cases.

I would rate the solution as an eight (out of 10). 

I started using UiPath version 2017.1 and currently, I am using 2018.4.6.

We had a requirement of fetching emails, which are basically requests from clients filled on our website form. We read those emails and process the data filled by the user in the form. There are different forms like a request to provide reports, a request to add or delete a user, etc.

After reading these emails, the bot has to take the necessary action on our Primary CRM application. Depending on the request type, the bot will navigate to the necessary module in the application and perform the request as defined in the email request. 

Earlier, we had a team of around 20 people working in one shift to handle these requests. We were able to scale back on 15 of these team members and utilize them for other work in the organization.

Five people are still required to process exceptions that the bots are not able to process due to multiple reasons. Additionally, the UiPath bots helped process the requests for the entire day, compared to the processing happening only during business hours. 

We were also able to reduce the time taken to process each request from approximately ten minutes to two minutes.

There are many RPA tools available in the market.

The most valuable feature that UiPath has is the ability to be able to use .NET functions. Basically, all of the data manipulation functions and classes available in .NET are accessible in UiPath and this makes it easier to cast data and use it correctly. 

Apart from this, the Queue is one of the best things that other tools do not have. This enables us to have work items queued and then run multiple bots to pick up items and work on them simultaneously.  

As more and more organization units are trying to use RPA, there might be a need to have separation of data within multiple tenants or organizational units. Not only on the front-end but also the ability to have a separate database for each Tenant. This will leave no room for the enterprise security team to raise questions on data separation. 

I feel that a Host Admin, being a master Admin, should be somehow able to login to different tenants. 

I have been using UiPath for the past two years.

UiPath is quite a stable product. I haven't seen many issues and I rarely had to contact the support team for reporting issues.

UiPath is completely scalable. Right from giving you an option to segregate processes between different organizational units to expanding to multiple robots.

Customer Service is prompt and the technical support team is highly efficient and knowledgeable.

We used Automation Anywhere earlier, which is a more user-friendly and less complex RPA tool compared to UiPath. We finally had to switch due to certain capabilities that were restrictive in AA. Stability was also a factor.

I think the setup cost is quite nominal, but the licensing might be on a higher side when compared to Automation Anywhere. However, we should not forget about the features and flexibility which UiPath has.

We did not evaluate any other options. We moved from Automation Anywhere to UiPath.

I think that for the most part, this product has all of the required features.

We automate processes across a number of different agencies. We automate whatever use case they determine. We tend to focus on the financial management side, but we have other areas that we've delved into such as HR and general data pulls for executive dashboards.

Oddly enough, a lot of our clients have not focused on work where there are people actively doing the process already. They've chosen to focus their efforts on processes for which they haven't had the manpower. It has been a little bit of a challenge in that the use cases tend to be coupled with a lot of process-development stuff. We have to figure out what the process is before we can even begin to automate it.

But over time, we plan on trying to shift that focus back to areas where they have a large number of people doing a process all the time and getting them to shift those people into doing the complex processes where there isn't a structure already determined.

The differentiation between unattended and attended bots is valuable, as well as being able to do portions of a process that are unattended coupled with portions that are attended. We can get human interaction, all within the same product.

The product is easy to use and definitely exceeded my expectations in that context. I have an IT enterprise architecture background with some computer programming experience. This was very easy to grasp.

The additional plugins and different partner programs have been a huge help.

My only complaint is that I hate VB.NET. If I had to pick a language, it would not be VB.NET. That whole .NET framework is just overly complicated. But I can understand why it's necessary for the use case of RPA.

We haven't had any problems with the stability. In comparison, we do use Blue Prism and that solution often runs into memory issues. That's one thing that we have not had to deal with, with UiPath.

I haven't had a lot of chances to test out the scalability firsthand, but the documentation is all there and it makes sense. It seems relatively simple, which is a big help. Once again, this is in contrast to Blue Prism whose documentation is not good. It's very confusing to figure out how you take it from a single-bot use case to multiple bots and more.

It's an easy setup. It's a single install which is pretty simple. Connecting to Orchestrator does get a little complex in some cases. It is what you make of it. Certainly, installing Studio on a single desktop for proof of concept is easy. It takes five minutes. When you start to get into enterprise-level setups, where everything's a different server and everything has to be connected, that's necessarily complex.

Blue Prism definitely has a simpler licensing structure, but I feel like that's almost a shot in the foot at certain points. It also gets kind of deceptive. There's a crossover point at which, if you're scaling up to a high number of bots, UiPath path definitely does come out cheaper. But the initial implementation has a higher cost.

We've been working on RPA, in general, for about two years. We're at different points in the process for different clients. We have some that have grasped onto it quite quickly and others that are still in the proof-of-concept/pilot realm, and we're trying to push it past that. We've been doing it for a fair amount of time, given the relatively young age of RPA as a whole.

I've done a number of different training sessions through the UiPath RPA Academy. The introductory ones are fine, but I really found a lot of value from the ones that focus on solution architecture, the courses that were more on the general infrastructure of how you would implement UiPath.

I would give the solution a solid eight. The first big thing with software is, if you're not running into bug issues all the time, that's an easy five right there. If it's easier to use, that's a six or seven. And it's just been consistently good. I haven't really run into any areas where I've had any trouble. The only real issue is that, from a consulting perspective, I can't really go out there and say, "We're going to use UiPath," all the time. We really have to leave it up to the client.

We use it for customer-facing and internal processes.

The most valuable feature is its time savings.

The product is easy to use and has exceed our expectations. We have a mixture of technical and non-technical people.

They need to improve features around legacy systems.

We currently lack in experience. Hopefully, after another year, we will be more experienced with the product.

UiPath has been stable all the way through. We have not experienced any issues.

It scales very well.

The technical support has been good to work with for the few cases that we had to raise.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. Including the Orchestrator, the setup took one to two months.

We have seen ROI. It has eliminated human errors and saved time for other teams at the company.

We looked at Blue Prism and two other vendors. Based on our comparison, UiPath was the better solution with better licensing.

My team uses the UiPath Academy and find it good and helpful.

Automation in our business is a new thing.

There are multiple use cases:

Automation of manual Excel workflow: Previously, our account support executive used to manually prepare client Excel sheet using a variety of third-party integration. Data flows manually into Excel and is then exported manually to a different system. What a fantastic work done by UiPath using integrations and webhooks. We almost saved 24 hours of weekly effort per employee and imagine we have to do this every time of the year and for hundreds of clients.

Automated data entry: Automated data entry of generated invoices was made so much easier with OCR recognition that we are trying to explore it in more departments like human resource and support systems.

It helped us in achieving the following efficiency and compliance:

• Cost management
• Drive innovation
• Creating internal/operational efficiencies
• Improving business process outcomes
• Improving business process agility.

I am an automation expert responsible for creating utilities which help support systems in easing down their business and saving lots of money with redundant efforts. Earlier, it was done using software code, but once I latched on to UiPath, I was overwhelmed with the ease, flexibility, integration, and support provided by it. 

Along with that, UiPath provides the best learning material and easiest learning curve making it one of the popular tools in the market. 

I also found the UiPath community forum very helpful which is a big plus for developers like us. The latest version of UiPath (Community Edition, v2019.2.0) contains a beta version of AI computer vision which we have just used, and I am sure that it's going to kill in the market with such an ease of recognizing UI elements. 

Additionally, now we can also retrieve the header of HTTP requests which was a must use case for our project, and it eased out a lot of re-work.

• I really like to see improvement in IDE for UiPath. There is still a lot of space where the user flow could be made more intuitive. 
• Enterprise support for UiPath is still spotty and is not fully capable of solving queries in a single session. They still require some time to get back on the issue. 
• I also have a suggestion: Don't try to overburden your product, with the early release of so much integration, with bugs. Do thorough testing, make sure it is bug-free, make sure there is proper documentation and make sure tech support is up and ready with known issues.

Development of any RPA solution using UiPath is very efficient and flexible. But at the same time, the testing is very difficult. The debugging feature of UiPath is quite difficult to understand, and there is no option that we could go and start from any step, rather, it needs to start from the very first step of the process which would be again a time-consuming factor.

The processes we automated are not only under the financial domain but also non-financial domain too. It proves that RPA is capable of implementing in almost every client. It really helps human to do better jobs rather than doing the same duties daily. It makes life easier. The dashboard that shows in UiPath Orchestrator would really help businesses to calculate their return of investments and all. Again, it would show a brief idea of the number of robots utilized.

I recommend UiPath to others. It doesn't limit your skills in a programming language. Instead, it has a more extensive feature on it. Hence we can utilize those to inject our code, and it is versatile to any programming language even though the technology that UiPath uses is built under .NET.

UiPath overall is a better RPA tool. But when it comes to the testing and debugging part, it's quite difficult. 

Most of the time, the RPA code solved through UiPath is stable. But sometimes UiPath would hang/stick itself.

It can be used to automate large complex solutions.

Excellent customer service/technical support with quick response to our query.

Yes, I was into Blue Prism. I switched to UiPath since the client wants to implement the solution using UiPath.

Initial setup is not difficult. Once we get the license key, the same needs to be provided during the installation.

I didn't implement through the vendor team.

I don't know how to calculate the ROI. But the dashboard within Orchestrator would provide a measure to show the total number of robots and processes.

Compared to other competitive market RPA tools, UiPath costs less, and they have a Community Edition as well.

Yes, at a high level and got impressed with the additional features in UiPath.

UiPath itself providing some activities to write coding and all. I suggest when we do an RPA solution, making use of such kind of activities which would increase the stability of the code.