We performed a comparison between AppWorx Workload Automation and UiPath Orchestrator based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The automated solution is the most valuable piece. Otherwise, we would have to be doing everything manually on every server."
"It is really a robust product."
"We have a lot of nightly jobs that need to be run. Therefore, we perform a lot of calculations and processes during nighttime hours."
"The solution is very user friendly so anyone can use it."
"Scheduling is a good feature."
"The most valuable features of AppWorx Workload Automation are simplicity and reliability. Additionally, they recently transformed the UI which is better."
"It is an object-based approach to task and process design in conjunction with conditional logic and event-based scheduling actions, which enables a build once/use often design methodology to be employed."
"The interface is good."
"From what I have seen, it is a reliable tool."
"One standout feature I like in UiPath Orchestrator is the scheduling capability."
"Using UiPath Orchestrator, we can deploy tasks across different environments, including virtual machines, for both attended and unattended processes."
"The reporting features are good."
"It was very simple to use and allowed us to easily record and manage activities."
"The response time and support quality are good."
"The platform serves as a valuable tool for orchestrating solutions within an organization."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it was a user-friendly product with an intuitive design."
"The internal security model can be complex when configuring multiple user groups."
"Reporting, forecasting and intelligence could be improved."
"The graphical interface is pretty cool but not the best so it could use some improvement."
"It is not really scaling per say because they are not putting much into it. They are trying to push their new product."
"The scalability could improve."
"As a general process automation and integration tool, it has been superseded by other offerings, notably the Workload Automation suite."
"The compliance features are limited to the server and not the entire infrastructure."
"It is difficult to integrate with the Active Directory (AD)."
"UiPath Orchestrator is sometimes a bit clunky, and a few things don't work in the tool as they should."
"The tool makes the laptops slow."
"It is challenging to accurately define text within images for the product."
"Clarity on integrating SQL databases and server configurations would improve implementation processes."
"One area for improvement in UiPath Orchestrator is enhancing automation for exceptional cases."
"I had faced issues with passwords and the monitoring feature."
"The solution’s licensing cost is high and could be improved."
"Limiting certain deployment scenarios and enforcing best practices could be beneficial."
AppWorx Workload Automation is ranked 17th in Workload Automation with 7 reviews while UiPath Orchestrator is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. AppWorx Workload Automation is rated 8.0, while UiPath Orchestrator is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AppWorx Workload Automation writes "The scheduling tool and finance module are valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Orchestrator writes "A user-friendly and reliable tool that is easy to implement". AppWorx Workload Automation is most compared with Automic Workload Automation, Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch, whereas UiPath Orchestrator is most compared with Control-M. See our AppWorx Workload Automation vs. UiPath Orchestrator report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
