NICE Robotic Automation Reviews

We used NICE for the back office. Our company has now integrated UiPath, and currently, we are using UiPath.

It is easy to deploy. To do the automation in NICE, you really need to use your programming expertise. There are no inbuilt features in it, and you have to create all the required features, which can be very interesting for a programmer.

Its connectivity with other applications should be improved. In the version that I was using, it would just stop interacting with the other application.

Its graphical interface should also be improved. It should have a user-friendly interface. Sometimes, people find it very difficult to understand.

One of the obstacles that I faced while programming was that if I needed any kind of help, there wasn't much content on the internet. It can be very difficult to find a solution for a particular issue. 

I have been using this solution for almost two years.

I am not sure about the latest version of NICE, but in the version that I was using, it would just stop interacting with the other application. I don't know what happened to the bot or NICE application, but all of a sudden, it would get disconnected from the other application. It was one of the main issues that we were facing.

I am not sure whether it is scalable or not. We had just ten people who were using NICE. My team is very small.

We contacted them only once or twice because we were very helpless and unable to solve the issue ourselves. They definitely helped us, but it is a complex task to raise a request and schedule a meeting with them. Sometimes, it is very difficult to contact them because of the timing issue.

We are no longer using NICE. We have moved to UiPath. You don't need programming skills to use UiPath, whereas to use NICE, you should definitely have a good knowledge of programming. 

There is not much information available on the internet about NICE, which makes it very difficult to use, whereas UiPath has a huge library. You can easily get help without contacting the vendor. 

The interface of UiPath is very easy to use, whereas NICE is very complex, and the automation is done in many parts.

It was easy to deploy because the installation packages are very simple. It doesn't require any maintenance.

We got help from the company. They helped us initially, and later on, we did it on our own.

As per my understanding, UiPath has a much lesser cost than NICE, but I am not sure.

I would recommend UiPath over NICE. I would rate NICE Robotic Automation a six out of ten.

It is a kind of desktop automation. It is for user-initiated and very specific automation, almost like macros. We have its latest version.

It is a kind of desktop automation. Its licensing model is a little bit different. It tends to be individual automation specific to a role. It excels at that.

We haven't found it to be as powerful as some of the other platforms. From a true RPA perspective, it is pretty far behind some of the other solutions. It has emerged as a more desktop automation kind of tool, but it lacks a lot of enterprise features.

It is not really a true RPA because of its licensing, which is kind of user-initiated. It would be nice it can be deployed at a more enterprise licensing model versus a user-based model.

It didn't have autonomous automation so far, and they have just released this feature. They have kind of hodgepodged a bunch of products together to get there, but it is not as seamless as other solutions.

I have been using this solution for just about a year. 

Its stability seems fine.

Because of its licensing model being at a per-user cost, it is more expensive to scale in a large enterprise. Its scalability is quite low as compared to an enterprise RPA license where you're paying for a bot that can work across hundreds and thousands of users. It gets expensive to scale it, and it is not as dynamic.

It is pretty straightforward. It is a basic solution.

I would not recommend this solution. I would advise others to look at a different solution. It is far behind other competitors in terms of a true RPA and lacks a lot of enterprise features. It does not have autonomous automation.

I would rate NICE Robotic Automation a five out of ten. It has a purpose, and it has a place. It is fine for what it does.

We use this solution for our customer representatives and also for robotic automation. We primarily use this NICE product for making automation processes. I'm the Chief Information Officer and we are customers of NICE. 

Robotic Automation has saved us time and money by moving our processes away from manual work. 

I like the automation features that the product offers. 

The solution is not as intuitive as it could be and the integration took a lot of time. I still need an integrator to help develop the processes rather than doing it myself. 

I've been using this solution for a few months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We communicate with the integrator when we need support and the integrator talks to NICE. We've had a good response to all the tickets we've opened. 

We used an integrator for the initial setup and implementation took nearly two months. All NICE products are a little complex to implement. We have around 30 users and plan to increase usage. We already have two more processes in development now. The solution is running all the time. 

I don't remember the figures but I know the licensing costs are similar to other solutions on the market. 

The RPA product has two aspects. It has the attended RPA that our customer representatives use and it has the unattended. When it comes to the attended processes, NICE provides a better product than other solutions.

I rate this solution eight out of 10.