UiPath Reviews

Mainly, we are using this product for automation, the kind of automation that a human usually does.

For example, if we process where 10 people are working manually, which we can automate using RPMs (Revolutions Per Minute), we can reduce this up to eight people. We can't reduce the human manpower 100%, but we can reduce up to 80% of the manpower. But, for the remaining 20% we need human interaction. Manpower is still needed for checking the report and verifying information. For these tasks, it is still key to have a human take charge of the process.

The specific feature I find most valuable is its ability to access a database, automating inquiries, and sending emails. This is very useful. Now, spreadsheets and ledger books can be done within five seconds.

I want to improve machine learning. 

I have used this product since 2016, and uploaded three different versions. It is very stable. 

It is scalable. There are no issues with scalability. 

There is a good support network. Their response time is good. They will find a solution within two days.

It was very simple to set up the solution for our company.

It's kind of like a process which can be done easily by anyone. There is no human involvement required. It is a very easy model to work with, and it is a win-win situation for both business owner and user.

The pricing differs on the requirements. If there is a huge purchase, then we get a discount.  There is not a fixed pricing of the product. 

Blue Prism is a competitor that has benefits, but we chose UiPath. 

It is very easy to learn and easy to adapt. For example, if we have to open a browser, we need code. If we are using Selenium, or some other programming that you have to write code for, it could be 30 or 10 to 15 lines of code. But in UiPath, there's true ease of use. It is as simple as dirt.

We use it across all functions, but our major groups right now are accounting followed by tax.

There are man-hour savings. Some of that equals headcount reduction, but we've also been able to redeploy people to more value-add activities. It has met our expectations. We wanted to automate manual tasks and it has successfully done that, across multiple systems. I would rate the performance benefits at nine out of ten.

The most valuable feature is automating tasks that are highly repetitive, such as Accounts Payable. It is also easy to use.

I would like it to better handle updates from other systems, whether it's SAP or a website. That's the thing that we struggle with. Anytime a system changes, we have to go in and modify the code.

Stability has been an issue. It has taken about three months for a task to become stable. That was not a huge surprise, but anytime there's an upgrade of a website, things change on a website that we're using as part of the automation task, we have to go in and make those changes to the code.

It's very scalable. That's been a nice feature of the tool.

We have not used technical support.

Dive in and get going.

We have used UiPath RPA Academy training and we like it. It gets us about 80 percent of the knowledge that we need, and then we have a group of in-house folks that will teach people who complete a class how our policies and our procedures are rolled into the tool.

It's changing daily but we have about five developers. We have business users who are now being trained to do development. They're actually working on developing their own task now. In just a few months, we'll probably have 15 to 20 developers.

We've been pretty pleased with the product. The lack of stability is our biggest issue. There are external issues that cause that, so we're not surprised by it. We were expecting it, but that's the biggest issue.

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 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 have worked in many industries and domains like healthcare and finance. I have automated web-based applications and Email automation.

Automated an end-to-end process that starts with the user raising a request in BMC Remedy. It handles requests for respective Roles in the GRC System of SAP. This process includes identifying the Request number from the BMC remedy Ticket. The BOT identifies respective control owners for requested roles and requests the controlling owner for their approval. Then BOT performs the Approval/Rejection process accordingly.

UiPath has improved my organization in many ways. With the help of UiPath, we were able to automate our mundane and repetitive tasks and this has saved us lots of time. Also, it has enhanced our productivity and reduces the error rate. We were able to complete our tasks as per client requirements.

Orchestrator is the feature that allows making use of robots for remote location systems. The work queue is the added advantage to maintain the bot data.

The inbuilt RE Framework makes development easier and fast.

UiPath helped me to automate the various complex and mundane processes. You can also run your Python and .NET code in UiPath, which makes the development easy.

The UiPath interface is very user-friendly and also it is easy to learn and use.

There are many online certifications in the UiPath Academy, so it helps the user to become a certified developer and learn everything from the online courses.

Support from the UiPath community is very good.

There are some problems with selectors and in PDF extraction so it could be improved a little bit.

There is a bug in UiPath that occurs when the URL of the web page changes. We are unable to scrap the data from that application page.

The Community Edition is not stable, so end-users working on the Community version may find some errors or issues when using this tool. Also, debugging is not as expected. A lot of issues occur during debugging.

I have been working on UiPath for one and a half years.

UiPath is good stability-wise. I have had a great experience with UiPath.

I find that the scalability of this tool is very good.

Support from UiPath technical community is very good and the response time, I would like to say, is very prompt.

We did not use another RPA solution prior to UiPath.

I was not involved in the Setup part. I had a team for this but as per my understanding, this tool is easy to setup.

I have implemented this through the in-house team.

We did not evaluate other options.

UiPath is a very complete software and allows you to make different robots depending on the system. Its main function is to save time and automate project management, which it does very well. It allows you to remove software and in this way, you will return to Create them but automated so that artificial intelligence (AI) can work correctly. It collaborates with employees.

It is possible to automate, for example, Excel files so that the forms can be filled automatically and not manually.

Overall, I am very happy and I recommend it.

I have been using UiPath in the healthcare area and right now, I am developing a healthcare project. I have also used it in retail projects and we have automated entire retail systems for vendors and customers. This has given them more reliable action and product services that are beneficial for both the organization and the user.

UiPath helps us in the execution of processes that need to be done repetitively, like data entry or content migration. It is fast, affordable, efficient, and easy to use.

Healthcare is also an important project that we have running. It saves time for patient eligibility. 

The most valuable features of UiPath are its activities. There are a number of activities available in the UiPath Studio, which are enough to automate all types of tasks.  Since UiPath is new in the market, it is constantly being updated every day, and new features are being added accordingly to the user requirements. 

I would like to see the computer vision activity updated.

There should be a click-event-update activity present in the UI Studio where we can click a link and the result should act as a button. Right now, this feature is not available in such conditions.

The OCR should be made faster to save more time.

If I am buying production licenses from UiPath it should provide at least two or three nonproduction licenses for further use.

The Studio should be made interactive like Orchestrator.

The debug option in Studio is not working on breakpoints, which is an issue that I have already highlighted in the forum.

I have been using the UiPath and its services for the past year. 

I would rate the stability of this solution and eight out of ten.

With respect to scalability, I would rate it at seven or eight out of ten.

I would rate the UiPath technical support a ten out of ten.

Prior to using UiPath, we used both Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism. We have found UiPath to be more reliable, easier to use, more stable, and 100% accurate while performing actions on any element or running automation anytime.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented this solution with our in-house team.

ROI for automation depends on the projects, timing, scope, and reliability.

The primary use case of this solution is to automate the repetitive tasks in the workplace. UiPath is connected to the Orchestrator to centrally manage the robots. Mobile Orchestrator is what we use to control the robots using Android and iPhone mobiles.

UiPath has saved us many FTEs. 24x7 working robots have helped us in saving a lot of time and have reduced human mistakes. Robots take care of tedious and repetitive tasks, where humans concentrate on critical decision making.

We can run and stop the robots at any time using the mobile orchestrator, which has helped us while we were on the go.

We can develop own activities using Visual Studio and integrate them into the UiPath Studio.

We have found the following features valuable:

1. UiPath Studio for developing robots.
   
2. Orchestrator is used to centrally control the robots and view the visual statistics for each one.
3. UiPath Academy provides free courses to learn the solution.
4. The UiPath Community Edition is a free version of Studio that helps everyone to learn and practice with the tool.
5. UiPath Connect & Go offers custom activities developed by people around the globe.

The aspects that we feel can be improved are:

1. Sometimes the tool is not stable with the selectors that are used to identify the different windows within the Windows operating system.
2. Backward compatibility is missing. After upgrading to the new version, some activities won't work.
3. It would be nice to have this tool support other operating systems too.
4. C# is missing and it currently supports only VB.Net. We would like to see C# support in the next release.

We have been using the UiPath tool for more than three years.

We use this solution mainly for data validation.

To start with, we are using Studio for many of our processes.

It reduces human efforts so our employees can put effort into other quality work.

I'm a manager, so we have UiPath for the team and my clients. I am a mediator. We are using Citrix for our VDI environment. We are going to implement the VDI.

Our client already has the UiPath Academy set up. It has been very beneficial in training our team, with its live involvement features, etc. It is good.

The solution has helped us eliminate human error. I would say, as it's now in its initial phase, this is somewhere around 80% to 90%.

It has also saved time for us.

We're just starting to use UiPath now but the automation process which reduces human intervention is the one we like most.

It's also very easy to use. I'm not directly involved in the program side. We have a team. I am the intermediator between our two teams. Those guys prepare the documentation and solution.

I would like to see them improve the validation part of the data categorization.

I would rate the stability of this product as five out of five. The team that works on this told me that once they come up with a use case, they can immediately implement it in UiPath. They have an idea and then can put that feature into practice. This can reduce many efforts.

We have about 500 people in our organization that are involved in the automation program.

We knew we had to invest in a new solution because when there are two categories of data, it is very useful to implement them with UiPath. We previously did this manually, as in with Excel and similar tools.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Every customer in our current scenario is looking to move to digital. They want to make their manuals digital. UiPath is one of the best solutions in the current market industry. That is why we chose UiPath. It is easy to use, plus it gives a lot of benefits to our clients and our own organization as well.

I would say that for the people who are using UiPath without any automation knowledge, the tool will be very useful. Apart from the UiPath platform, there are a lot of videos on YouTube. People can see a session from start to end. That will be useful.