We performed a comparison between Automic 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."It's easy to train other people. A new developer could come in and learn it very quickly."
"Unlike other Orchestration or Workload Automation tools, Automic Workload Automation stands out as a versatile single solution capable of handling various use cases such as business process automation, workload automation, service orchestration, and PR automation. There's no need for additional tools to make it compatible with your specific use case. Automic Workload Automation can handle it all without requiring any sideline tools to be installed."
"Number one, A+, is the scripting language, and the ability to go in, and take an already robust, consistent, strong tool, and turn it into an incredibly scalable, flexible tool, that you can literally do anything you want to with."
"Being able to script, create something I want the software to do for a specific job. This allows me to do that. Very powerful."
"The most valuable feature is that it can be installed on any type of application on every kind of operating system and the agent can use it on these applications and systems."
"You can create very fine, granular workflows with a lot of possibilities. It gives you the possibility to do things in many ways."
"Stability has been great. My team, we call ourselves "the invisibles" because things run so well that sometimes you almost feel like you have to try to break something to actually get acknowledged."
"Automic is perfect to work with for a lot of job loads."
"It was very simple to use and allowed us to easily record and manage activities."
"From what I have seen, it is a reliable tool."
"UiPath Orchestration works effectively in deploying, scheduling, and running automated bots across different environments."
"It allows for the segregation of users, ensuring each user has access to specific environments based on their roles."
"The centralized dashboard and asset management in UiPath Orchestrator have proven valuable in enhancing operational efficiency."
"The reporting features are good."
"UiPath Orchestrator is a user-friendly solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it was a user-friendly product with an intuitive design."
"There are some scripting elements that could be added."
"We have some problems with updates where some functions are changed, so you have to check your whole system to see if everything is still running. The update process for us is around two months of testing and one day of updates."
"It is a bit of a problem, because they like to do email ping-pong via their web page. Sometimes, it would be much easier if someone would call you on the phone."
"The frustration that we have probably had in the past is where CA tools run for a period of time, then they get deprecated, and you have to build a new one."
"During installation, some database elective issues popped up. These took some time to fix, but after some back and forth communication, these issues were resolved."
"We would like to have token-based authentication. Where we do not have to use a password, and can use tokens for authentication in other systems."
"I don't know if they have it now, but a mobile version would be good so instead of logging in on my laptop to see something, I could just go in through an app and see if a certain job is running or not. That would be pretty slick."
"The new user interface needs improvement. The previous version was good and stable. Now, we have to check the new one before using a web browser. It is not stable."
"The code management for the Studio could be improved."
"UiPath Orchestrator should improve its UI and make it more user-friendly."
"It is challenging to accurately define text within images for the product."
"Clarity on integrating SQL databases and server configurations would improve implementation processes."
"I had faced issues with passwords and the monitoring feature."
"Limiting certain deployment scenarios and enforcing best practices could be beneficial."
"The product must provide process mining features."
"It's a bit difficult to connect to the licenses."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while UiPath Orchestrator is ranked 11th in Workload Automation with 21 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while UiPath Orchestrator is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Orchestrator writes "A user-friendly and reliable tool that is easy to implement". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and AppWorx Workload Automation, whereas UiPath Orchestrator is most compared with Control-M. See our Automic 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.
