UiPath Platform Reviews

We use UiPath for social media marketing.

UiPath increases efficiency, speeds delivery, and automates repetitive tasks to save time. We can streamline tasks and make daily work more meaningful. Instead of doing the same things over and over, employees can focus on more important work.  

It also allowed us to automate many internal processes, saving significant time and increasing the accuracy of reports and monitoring. It also helped improve customer satisfaction and made significant time and cost savings.

The most valuable feature is the autopilot or copilot AI feature. While we have not used it yet, I'm told the Document Understanding feature is also highly powerful. SaaS is also valuable.

The UiPath Studio development suite response can be a little sluggish, depending on the workflows you use. I use a lot of legacy workflows, and the application response is slow. 

I have used UiPath for three years.

The UiPath Orchestrator has been pretty stable overall. There have been a few outages. 

We started with three licenses and still have that. We also have one test bot test license, and it's scalable.

When we opened a specific ticket, UiPath lacked the resources to help us. Getting someone to help you was hard because you needed to go through different channels. 

Positive

We needed to connect three unattended bots to the Automation Cloud and Orchestrator. Setting up on-premises for different applications that don't have their own infrastructure may be a little more difficult. 

We did not use a partner for implementation.

We've saved about 350 hours using UiPath, which equals about $500,000. When we automate jobs that take longer manually, the time savings are pretty straightforward.

UiPath's pricing and licensing are in line with the market. We haven't used AI units yet, so I'm unsure about their pricing.

We're a financial institution, and we started using UiPath for small, simple processes and day-to-day tasks, such as adding and removing users and updating information, but we're also exploring opportunities to automate lending processes.

We typically evaluate a process first to see if it's appropriate for automation. Sometimes, we've identified bad processes and needed to update documentation before we can implement them.

UiPath has allowed our employees to focus more on servicing our members rather than being bogged down by mundane tasks. In the last year, we have saved about 6,500 hours for our users, equating to the time of two full-time employees.

With UiPath, we've saved costs, increased productivity, and reduced stress on our employees. It has saved our employees time. They're thinking more about their processes instead of just doing what they're told. It places more onus on employee creativity.

I primarily work with task capture, which has been valuable. We have created a template for ourselves and reused it for all these processes. Other departments also use it for their procedures, even if the process is not automated.

We struggle to demo our processes. For whatever reason, we can't get the bot to run so that someone can watch it simultaneously. We press the button, and it shows that it's done rather than showing how the bot works. 

We started using UiPath with a partner two years ago and transitioned to handling everything in-house last year.

The stability of UiPath is good. We do not encounter issues with logging in or frequent service failures.

I rate UiPath support nine out of 10. Their customer service is good. They are always willing to help us and address our concerns. 

Positive

We initially used a UiPath partner but have since moved operations in-house. Our in-house experience has been better.

We have seen a return on investment. The 6,500 hundred hours we saved using UiPath translates to a savings of about $56,000 per year.

I rate UiPath 10 out of 10.

I piloted the introduction of UiPath to my team with two projects. The first, domain monitoring, automated our ten-plus Pega applications' quarterly security and health checks. We designed an architecture that could be mapped across all domains, streamlining the process to run weekly instead of quarterly. This provided timely reports on application health via Webex. The second project was a more straightforward test suite automation for another UI-based application. These two successful pilot projects showcased the capabilities of UiPath, with the domain monitoring still in use today.

Building automation with UiPath is straightforward, but it's essential to be familiar with the target application and have a basic understanding of coding and if-else statements. This knowledge will help troubleshoot any unexpected errors. Overall, I'd rate the ease of building automation with UiPath an eight out of ten.

While working on the projects, we used two versions of UiPath: the enterprise and cloud versions. The orchestrator that comes with the enterprise version is different from the cloud version. The cloud version had better end-to-end automation, and the ease of use and accessibility were superior to those of the enterprise orchestrator, which is the on-premise version of UiPath. Although the enterprise version lacks a few features, the cloud version provides a complete solution.

I was impressed by UiPath's user community. We used an open-source library that someone else had built and generously shared with the UiPath community. It ideally suited our needs. The user community is also very responsive, and we readily receive answers to our questions.

We didn't see immediate benefits from UiPath because it was a new tool I was piloting. We had to prove to upper management that it saved significant time, and we eventually eliminated manual testing. It took until the project's end to demonstrate this, as management focuses on results, not processes. However, other teams adopted UiPath after completion, so benefits appeared after two or three months. It took time to get people on board, but they eventually embraced the idea.

UiPath has significantly improved our efficiency by automating domain and application monitoring, saving valuable time and working hours. These tasks were previously quite intensive and repetitive, demanding considerable focus and effort from our employees. With UiPath handling these processes, we've freed up our workforce to take on more engaging and strategic responsibilities.

My favorite aspect of UiPath is its user-friendly interface, as it's a no-code, low-code platform that eliminates the need for extensive coding. Its drag-and-drop functionality, coupled with UiPath's comprehensive library suite, simplifies automation tasks. For instance, the Microsoft Outlook and SharePoint libraries allow seamless integration with those platforms, streamlining processes like connecting to SharePoint in Microsoft 365. In essence, the combination of UiPath's robust infrastructure and versatile tools significantly enhances its usability and effectiveness.

I found the UiPath Academy courses to be a bit rigid in their curriculum. It was more beneficial for me to learn from the forums and YouTube videos. Their courses were tailored to particular roles, with a course on UiPath in data science being heavily focused on Excel. While it was a well-structured course, it didn't align with my job's limited use of Excel. Overall, their courses are well-built, but I found YouTube a more suitable learning platform for my needs.

UiPath Studio provides comprehensive tools and libraries for building automation, but it lacks a built-in feature to generate consolidated reports after automation runs, detailing successes, failures, and operational features. This absence of detailed logging information makes it difficult to troubleshoot issues and identify whether the problem lies within the application or the automation itself. While UiPath's orchestrator website provides some information, it's insufficient for demonstrating automation runs and accomplished features to stakeholders. Although a future release may address this, the lack of robust reporting capabilities remains a significant area for improvement. Additionally, UiPath's diverse suite of licenses can confuse end-users, making it challenging to determine the most suitable option. While the company has improved features, the increased number of licenses creates a knowledge gap between what's available and user understanding. Clearer explanations of each license would simplify decision-making for potential users and streamline adoption.

I have been using UiPath for one year.

Once we have the licensed version of UiPath, we don't anticipate issues with caching. We were using the 2021 Studio version because it was stable. Although the UiPath team suggested upgrading, I'm not certain about the reasons. I can't comment on the latest models, but the 2021 version was reliable.

The scalability of UiPath depends on the number of licenses. To deploy our automation, we need to utilize robots responsible for executing the automation we've built in a user-less environment. Scalability is directly proportional to the number of robots we have, which is, in turn, determined by the number of licenses. Therefore, more licenses translate to greater scalability.

The initial onboarding of UiPath was straightforward, but the only challenge we encountered was connecting UiPath Studio to the Orchestrator. UiPath Studio is where automations are built, while the Orchestrator is where they are deployed and run. This required some back-and-forth with the product team and my technical lead. However, this issue only arises during the initial setup. Once someone familiar with the process sets it up, it becomes easier. There were some challenges connecting and deploying the first automation, specifically between the Orchestrator and Studio.

Three people were involved in the deployment: my technical lead, who liaised with the product team to discuss progress and challenges; myself, responsible for building and deploying the automation; and one of my junior colleagues, who assisted me. In short, we had a three-person team.

We used UiPath and built and deployed that project, which ran successfully for approximately two quarters while I was away. However, the cost and licensing associated with UiPath became an issue. The license we were using offered excellent features specific to our needs, but it didn't provide much beyond that. It didn't make sense to continue spending much money on UiPath, even though it saved us time and money. The savings were essentially being reinvested back into purchasing the UiPath license. While UiPath licenses offer valuable features, they are expensive. For our single-use case, investing that much wasn't justifiable. We switched to Selenium, an open-source automation tool. Although it took additional time to deploy the same solution with Selenium, and it might not be a 100 percent match in functionality, it allowed us to save on costs.

The cost of UiPath is justified for organizations with many use cases but not for one or two use cases.

I give UiPath a seven out of ten.

The advice I'd like to give new UiPath users is to first understand their specific use case for UiPath. I've noticed some teams try to adopt UiPath by first figuring out a solution and then trying to retrofit it to their existing problems. Instead, I suggest thoroughly understanding the problem before creating a solution. Many teams see others using UiPath and assume it's a cool new tool they can simply apply to their existing issues. This approach rarely leads to optimal results. You might be able to build a solution, but it won't be the most efficient. For first-time users, I recommend understanding your problem, then exploring UiPath's capabilities to determine the best solution. There are plenty of resources available, like forums and YouTube, to help with the building process. Remember, understand the problem first, then build the solution.

The use cases for UiPath depend on the specific requirements of each department within an organization. We typically meet with small groups of employees to identify potential automation opportunities within their departments. If a use case is suitable for automation, we develop the feature and build the bot for the customer.

UiPath integrates seamlessly with our existing products. Leveraging its AI capabilities, we're identifying new use cases. Additionally, UiPath offers a "bring your own model" approach, allowing us to utilize machine learning models from other vendors if needed.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation.

As a team of six developers, we rely heavily on the UiPath user community for answers to our questions.

UiPath helps us significantly reduce our on-premises footprint. It provides an automated touchless environment that we use in the administration and finance departments to automate a portion of our business processes.

We incorporate UiPath Academy courses into our developer training program to ensure they achieve specific certifications. For instance, all developers must obtain the professional UiPath certification. Each year, we prioritize which modules to target based on relevant use cases.

We use AI functionality in our automation. Communication mining and task mining are AI components of UiPath.

UiPath helps speed up and reduce the cost of digital transformation.

It helps reduce human error and frees  up our staff time to focus on other tasks.

UiPath has helped save us costs overall.

The biggest advantage of UiPath is its user-friendly environment. Unlike Azure and Blue Prism, UiPath offers a robust orchestration platform that allows central management of our entire RPA ecosystem from a single orchestrator. Additionally, UiPath excels in automating web applications.

UiPath provides a comprehensive suite of solutions for robotic process automation. Beyond the core UiPath Studio for building robots, they offer a range of AI-powered products such as communication mining, task mining, and the Automation Cloud. These solutions seamlessly integrate within a unified environment.

The pricing is high and has room for improvement.

I find UiPath's development environment to be challenging. Ideally, I'd prefer a more user-friendly approach like Blue Prism's, which utilizes a building block concept.

I have been using UiPath for 4 years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath 8  out of 10.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath 9 out of 10.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I have used Kofax but UiPath is far ahead of it.

The initial deployment is straightforward. Deploying bots using UiPath is easy.

We used external consultants.

UiPath is priced high.

I would rate UiPath 8 out of 10.

I recommend UiPath to others.

The use cases are quite broad.  UiPath is used in customer contact centers, supply chain management, operations, etc. It is useful for the intelligent automation of task-oriented processes.

It's easy to sell clients on a cloud-based solution like UiPath because it's the easiest to maintain and run. Some of the customers have already adopted a cloud-first strategy, so it's crucial for them not to have to operate their own data center. Others need to have a data center for privacy reasons. 

The solution helps customers reduce costs by about 20 percent. UiPath doesn't require any expensive or complex application upgrades. It has reduced human error. UiPath has improved outcomes like SLAs and customer satisfaction scores while reducing wasted time. 

UiPath frees up employee time, but the exact amount varies from client to client. It depends on your scope and your use case. You can obviously save time. It depends on how you design the process or whether you're automating one process or 10. 

I appreciate the stability of the UI automation, the studio, and the development environment. I also like the platform's rich capabilities. Stability and performance are always essential when automating through the user interface. This is what they definitely bring to the table. 

Regarding the ease of building automations, I would rate UiPath nine out of 10. It's the best tool in the marketplace. It's easy to build automations, and the interface is easy to use. I like how it integrates with the Orchestrator and everything works together. There are so many different use cases that we can easily connect through APIs, databases, and user interfaces to automate all kinds of applications. 

UiPath's end-to-end automation is critical. It's the most efficient way to automate. You automate mundane tasks so that people can focus on everything that requires expert skills or knowledge. 

The solution's user community is amazing. There's a lot of knowledge and experience, and it's easy to access that information. It's a highly active community. The UiPath Academy also has some attractive content that gives you hands-on experience with the product. The courses are easy to follow. 

I have been using UiPath for about three years. 

Excellent stability.

UiPath's scalability is excellent. 

I have had limited contact with UiPath support, which says something about the product. 

I have used Automation Anywhere and UiPath. I've looked at other options, but UiPath is at the high end.

Deploying UiPath is straightforward. It's fast. You can deploy UiPath in five minutes depending on what you need and how everything is configured up front. You need to get a platform account and set up the machines that will be part of the solution. You also need to set up users and assign them licenses. UiPath requires some maintenance based on the types of packages you're running. One person can do it. It isn't too complex. 

UiPath is relatively expensive. However, it's the leading product because it has so many capabilities. 

I rate UiPath 9 out of 10. When implementing, I recommend sketching out your costs over multiple use cases and comparing them to an alternative solution. 

There are multiple use cases. We have use cases for the ticketing system for assigning the ticket, resolving or maybe closing the ticket, and opening a new ticket. We also have a business use case related to insurance. I worked for an insurance client, and by using automation, we could create a policy that is used for testing purposes. If they had a new enhancement or an issue, they wanted to test whether it was working properly or not. They provided us with some raw data, and we tested that.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. It is very important for us.

We use the AI functionality in our automation program. It helps us with decision-making. The AI functionality has enabled us to automate more processes overall.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation and reduces the cost of digital transformation.

UiPath definitely minimizes the operational expenses. By automating the static tasks that people are doing on a daily basis, there is a reduction.

UiPath reduces human errors. With static tasks, such as data entry, there are more chances of human error. With robots, there is less chance for error.

UiPath frees up employee time for other tasks. By automating static processes, we can save time and utilize it for other tasks.

UiPath definitely saves costs, but we cannot fully replace humans with robots. A human is required in certain cases. We can reduce at least 70% of manual tasks and for maybe 20% to 30% of tasks, we need human intervention.

The IDP feature is most valuable in UiPath because there are a lot of invoices and bills in every company. If they want to extract from a scanned document, it is very useful.

UiPath is very easy. We can build very complex processes within a few days.

UiPath has a very good community. If I am facing some issues, it is very easy to get the help of the community. They provide a solution very fast if I post an issue there.

UiPath Academy is good for learning purposes and certifications. They have beginner courses and advanced courses. By using them, it is easy to implement UiPath in a real-life project or process.

When it comes to decision-making, the robot will work based on what we feed it. It will not take any decision at runtime the way a human can. If they can put more intelligence in the robot for decision-making, it will definitely be beneficial for us. For example, if something is not working and it can dynamically decide at runtime what would be the next step, it will be beneficial.

Additional features such as chatbots and AI should be included in the UiPath itself. UI development is another thing. It could be improved for web development and app development.

I have more than six years of experience with UiPath. I have also worked with Automation Anywhere for a year, but I am more familiar with UiPath.

It is scalable. They have ML and also Python. They are adding a few more features.

We have around 1,000 people using UiPath. We have different groups in our company. We have separate teams. There are multiple different tools. UiPath is in one vertical. Automation Anywhere is in a separate vertical. 

Most of the time, if we raise a ticket, they help us to resolve the issue. I would rate their support a seven out of ten. The response time is as per the issue. Sometimes, it is very fast, and at other times, I have to wait for a day or two to get help from UiPath, so I have had both good and bad experiences with their support.

Neutral

I have worked with Automation Anywhere. I have also done scripting, but I had to write a lot of code to automate, whereas, with UiPath, it is simple. It is drag and drop.

It is deployed on-premises. There was no issue at all in deploying it.

For the deployment of bots, we have different VM servers. They are unattended ones. The deployment of bots is a very simple task. 

I can do the deployment myself. It is not a big task.

It saves six to seven hours for one person in a day. It saves the cost of one FTE, which is very high in US dollars. It is more than the cost of a robot. There are definitely savings. If the utilization is more, the savings would be more.

When I started with UiPath, there was a desktop model, and we did not have to purchase Orchestrator. Now, there is a bundle or package of Orchestrator with attended or unattended robots, so the cost is a little bit on the higher end. They are selling the Orchestrator model or the admin model. If someone wants to purchase the standalone or desktop model, they cannot do that, so the cost is on the higher side, but if we purchase more licenses, it gets reduced. If we purchase fewer licenses, it will be high.

If you have good use cases, I would advise using UiPath. Compared to other tools, UiPath is very easy to learn. A trial version of UiPath is easily available, whereas the trial version of Automation Anywhere and Blue Prism is not easily available. Automation Anywhere provides a trial version nowadays, but previously, it was very difficult to train people on that. That is the reason UiPath is the market leader at this time.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

I have worked on use cases for three domains, which include the banking, health care, and insurance domains, and designed bots for automating processes.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation. In my three years of experience, I have developed bots for banking, insurance, and healthcare domains.

UiPath is very easy to use. We are able to automate manual processes with bots, so the work gets done in a very short time. Manual work that takes months can be done in two or three weeks.

UiPath helps to speed up digital transformation. It is easy to use. It completely removes human intervention. We can develop unattended bots. It brings efficiency and also helps in reducing human headcount. After UiPath was launched in our organization, there was a reduction of 800 employees.

UiPath Studio and Orchestrator have been useful in designing the bots. I know about Document Understanding, but I am not working on integration services such as app integration. For building automation, a lot of activities are there. There is load taxonomy or taxonomy creation. After that, there is digitization, classification, and extraction. The validation part is also there. These are the steps for designing a bot using Document Understanding.

I have used UiPath Academy courses. I have done two courses. I did the UiPath Associate certification in 2021, and UiPath Advanced RPA Developer v1.0 certification in January 2023. I am currently preparing for the advanced UiARD certification. Through the UiPath Academy courses, I have learned a lot of things about queues, Orchestrator, advanced methods, etc. It is very good for learners.

On my organization laptop, while doing database activities, such as database connect activity, UiPath Studio hangs. We click on the screen, but there is no response. The only option that works at that time is to open the task manager and forcefully stop the services of UiPath. UiPath gets closed, and we again have to run UiPath Studio. 

UiPath Studio is also slow during web scraping and screen scraping.

In terms of new features, UiPath already has many features, but its pricing can be better for small businesses.

I have been working with UiPath since December 2020. It has been three years since I have been working as an RPA developer.

We are an organization with about 1,300 employees, and we have 20 people working with UiPath.

I have not used their support. When I have a problem in developing a bot, we use the UiPath community, and they provide me with a solution for the same.

I have also used Blue Prism. UiPath is easy to understand. It is easier to develop and deploy bots in UiPath. In Blue Prism, there are some challenges related to how to create processes. In UiPath, there are many sections such as Control Panel, activity properties, or object repository. They provide a modern experience to the developers. It is better than Blue Prism.

To deploy three projects, I had to install UiPath on the client's machine, and it took only one and a half days. 

We have two or three people for the deployment of projects. We have one person to deploy the code on a client machine. We also have a solution architect and a support team. The deployment requires only two or three days.

Small businesses do not have the budget to purchase the UiPath license. They should provide a cheaper license option for small businesses.

It is a very good solution. There are various RPA solutions, but UiPath is currently the number one solution in India as well as outside of India.

I would rate UiPath a ten out of ten. I love this tool. It works very efficiently.

I use UiPath to automate my client's PDF files and emails.

Compared to other programming languages, UiPath is exceptionally easy to build automation with.

UiPath enables end-to-end automation. In our current automation process, we receive the file from the client, which we then use to automate their email notification process.

UiPath has helped minimize our client's on-premises footprint.

I have taken advantage of UiPath's Academy courses for both beginner and advanced training, acquiring a significant number of valuable tips in the process.

By implementing UiPath, we have significantly reduced human error in the process. We have also streamlined the process, reducing the number of humans required from ten to just two, further minimizing the possibility of errors.

UiPath offers many valuable features, but the most valuable is the accuracy of its workflow process.

I would like more flexibility during recording and debugging because currently, when UiPath is in debug mode, we cannot make any changes.

I have been using UiPath for one year.

UiPath is stable.

The initial deployment is easy. I manually run the bot to deploy UiPath.

I would rate UiPath an eight out of ten.

The only maintenance we do is delete the logs to free up the storage.

We can find answers to all our questions regarding UiPath in the online forum.

UiPath is a strong solution with a significant presence in the automation space. I recommend UiPath.