UiPath Platform Reviews

My use cases for UiPath include finance, HR, SAP, and technology. 

The tool's most valuable feature is RPA. 

UiPath should improve its licensing structure. 

I have been using the product since 2018. 

The selectors and modern UI are not stable yet. 

The product is scalable. 

The tool's support is good. 

Positive

The tool's deployment is straightforward. We started with contractors and built some POCs. We had a pilot to select the business criteria. 

UiPath's implementation team helped us with the deployment. 

The solution's pricing is a challenge. Every time I go to renew my contract, the prices increase. It is getting expensive. 

The business objectives we tried to achieve with UiPath include time savings and user satisfaction. 

Automation has freed up our employees' time. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We are primarily using the solution to automate manual processes for users. The solution helps reduce their efforts. We connect it to databases and do web automation.

The solution has helped us to reduce costs and lessened manual effort. We've been able to cut back on employee costs by reducing human interventions. 

The automation is very good. I like that I can connect various databases and our framework templates. It is effective for building automation.

The orchestrator functionality is good.

We've found the solution offers good cost savings. It reduces the need for human effort. It can cut down the costs of an entire unit via automation. Automating the process has been quite effective. When humans are involved, it sometimes can take days and now we can get those tasks down to a few minutes. By reducing the time it takes to resolve problems, our customers are happier. 

It has helped us implement end-to-end automation. It's very important for us. It really helps us in the current market and will help us save on future costs.

We have user forums if we have any issues. We can always post questions there. We also have a Community Enterprise Edition that helps practice and gain certifications. It helps us to gain experience with UiPath.

It can do whatever a human can do and mimic their actions.

I've used the Academy classes. There are UiPath docs, and you can go through the material, however, the courses are helpful for learning. We can go through tutorials to learn how to build a use case or sequence by ourselves. It gives us use cases to build on our own. It's really helpful that we can go ahead and mimic their steps and create our own work.

The solution reduces the cost of digital transformation. Even if the processes are complex, we can manage it. Once we understand a process, and we are able to build something end-to-end, it helps digitize processes, which translates to benefits and cost savings. 

We've been able to reduce human error. My process is very complex. Even an expert may not be able to do the process I am automating. I'm talking about 100 to 200 steps. That's a lot of places to introduce human error if you don't have automation. 

It's freed up human time.

UiPath has helped save costs. The clients have been happy with the results. 

The issue we have is around security and internal policies. If I want to update a queue item to the orchestrator, not only from UiPath but from Javascript, I can only use an item from UiPath. It's restrictive, based on our company guidelines. 

If there is any change in the selector in any application, we have to make changes accordingly in the code. Then we have to redeploy it again. It's one of the challenges we have. We cannot automatically change the selectors in the bot. 

My client has very old and complex applications. Getting that sorted for the bot can be very difficult at first. There may be a few extra steps in production.

I do need to check continuously for messages in Slack to work through processes. I have to run my bot every minute. There is some complexity with automating my bot through UiPath. I'm not sure if UiPath completely supports Slack automation. I've seen tutorials that show you can automate in Slack, however, I've had some real problems with the process. 

The stability of UiPath is very good. However, to build a bot requires us to go through many phases. Bot development is easy, however, getting access to applications can slow the process down.

We're using the solution around the globe. We are using the solution in different areas in India and we have many teams using UiPath. 

The scalability of UiPath is very good. I'd rate it nine out of ten. 

Technical support has good knowledge of what's happening. Whoever supports the bots, however, needs to have good knowledge. 

Positive

I did not previously use a different solution. UiPath was something my client wanted. 

The implementation was easy. Once we connect our bot to the orchestrator, it's very easy to publish to the orchestrator and move it. 

We deploy our code in a remote VM. Due to the license issues, we cannot have UiPath installed in the VM, where we deploy our bots. We have to do it via the orchestrator. There may be licensing issues that make it difficult to deploy UiPath to virtual machines. If we have any issues, debugging is difficult. 

We do have templates related to the company and use those to build automation. 

There is maintenance required while using the solution. Once you commit your code, the maintenance is pretty easy. We upload our code to the orchestrator. Beyond that, we may need to handle updates of UiPath. 

We did use a third party to get some credentials. Everything else was handled in-house. 

We have seen an ROI in the form of reducing employee costs. 

I don't deal with the costs. The company is handling the licensing. 

I did not evaluate other options before using UiPath.

I have not yet used UiPath's AI functionality. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I would advise others to make sure they learn the solution and gather knowledge in order to understand how to start before jumping into real use cases. 

I am a developer, and I use UiPath to extract PDFs for invoices and logistics in the banking industry. 

UiPath can be deployed either on-premises or in the cloud, depending on the customer's requirements.

There are times when the logic is difficult, but the majority of the time, it is easy to build automation using UiPath.

UiPath enables us to implement end-to-end automation, which is essential for our customers. We gather all the requirements from the customer, analyze their feasibility, and proceed to the development phase where we build bots according to the customer's needs. After that, we move on to User Acceptance Testing to ensure the bots meet expectations. Finally, we deploy the automation into production.

UiPath aids in enhancing organizations by cutting down costs and saving time. Without UiPath, a task like collecting and uploading information that typically takes humans around 40 minutes can be completed by the UiPath bot in just ten minutes.

Our customers primarily use UiPath for cost savings.

In addition to saving time, UiPath also eliminates human errors by consistently processing 100 percent of the tasks each time without requiring any human intervention.

UiPath helps reduce our customer's on-premises footprint.

UiPath Academy is excellent for learning about the solution's capabilities and how it works, especially in the beginning. It provides end-to-end courses and certifications for both beginners and advanced users.

UiPath accelerates digital transformation and reduces costs by eliminating the human element. However, this transformation does require IT application support for configurations and security.

UiPath's most valuable feature is its ability to view and extract any data throughout the entire development process in the automation framework.

The document understanding has room for improvement. 

I have been using UiPath for three years.

UiPath is extremely stable and that is why customers ask for the solution.

I rate UiPath's scalability a nine out of ten.

The technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used Microsoft Power Automate. When comparing it with UiPath, one significant difference is that we can use UiPath on a local machine to easily build a process, upload it, and create schedules effortlessly. Microsoft has an advantage in the cloud, but it is not as effective on-premises.

The number of people required for each deployment depends on the complexity of each project. For more complex projects, two to three people are required, and it can take up to three weeks to complete.

Our customers experience a return on investment when using UiPath, owing to the time saved in performing tasks and the improved accuracy compared to manual efforts.

We can start to see value after one month of using UiPath.

There are two versions of UiPath; the first is the free community version, which is limited, and the second is the premium version which requires payment but is recommended for large-scale productions.

UiPath's cost is acceptable.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. UiPath is reliable and accurate.

The maintenance is easy. We only need one person to monitor and maintain UiPath.

I recommend trying the free community version first to ensure that it meets the organization's requirements and then consider upgrading to the premium version in order to handle larger projects.

We are a distributor and most of our customers were manufacturing and financial companies, so the use cases fell into categories like financial, accounting, and procurement departments. We used it to improve business processes.

With UiPath, my clients were able to free their employees and staff for other types of work. They saw value in that. Staff didn't have to get up at 6 AM or work around the clock in front of a monitor all day. It freed up staff that had been doing menial, manual, repetitive tasks to do something more valuable.

In some cases, it reduced the time it took to get a task done from hours to a couple of minutes. Workflows that would take up to four or five hours were reduced to taking 10 to 15 minutes.

It also definitely reduced the amount of human error to almost zero. 

UiPath Studio has all kinds of tools and it's practical to navigate around the application. Implementing any project can be done very quickly using UiPath. Also, the robot capacity is phenomenal. They work as long and as much as you need them to and provide optimal performance.

Building automation with UiPath is easy and takes a small amount of time. It's really intuitive and doesn't require advanced development or any technical skills. It's easy for anyone to pick up and understand. Any lower-skill employee or developer can learn to use it quickly.

We would usually do a pilot project with a company and, afterward, transfer all the knowledge and capabilities to them so that they were able to develop things themselves. Especially with the UiPath Academy, which provides online courses, and the UiPath forums, everyone could learn how to use it. My clients had no problem picking it up after our first pilot project. The advanced developer courses help a new developer quickly learn how to use it.

There can be technical issues, but it's rarely about a server quitting. They are more like connectivity, platform, and software version issues, but there are no issues with UiPath performance.

I would also like to see UiPath assist clients in scaling up their usage of the application because most of our clients had trouble expanding their usage into other departments. It was hard for them to calculate the exact value they were getting. Some of our clients were flying blind.

Some of our clients hadn't really seen enormous impact from implementing and using automation yet. They had just started, and they saw the value in it, but it was hard for them to expand or add more value to automations with UiPath.

I worked with UiPath from 2019 to 2022.

It can take their technical support some time to respond. And sometimes, the assigned staff doesn't have the right knowledge, but that doesn't happen often.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward. Our clients did ask for tips and tricks, but they didn't need a full consultation. They managed it themselves. It's really intuitive.

UiPath pricing is high and sometimes it's quite complicated as well, because there are loads of components and loads of product portfolios. It works, but it could be better. The pricing could be more attractive.

UiPath definitely speeds up digital transformation but whether it reduces the costs of doing so depends on a number of factors.

Over the years, UiPath has done a pretty good job of continuously improving its product by adding robot capacities and changing versions. In terms of features, they have everything covered, with AI features, data mining, process mining, and all that was done quite ahead of everybody else.

I would say that UiPath, as a company, was better in the past. Nowadays, I have less confidence in the company's situation, not that I don't think it's stable. And their ability to improve is a 10 out of 10.

My advice is to study your use cases and go to the UiPath Academy. You'll find everything you're looking for and there is a big community. UiPath is easy to use, but you have to understand your work processes thoroughly and not just depend on the application to help you.

We use it mostly for the banking and insurance domains. We are a service-based company and the tools we use depend on our clients' requirements.

UiPath provides scalability, quality, and a high level of accuracy. It has definitely reduced human error.

It also helps minimize the on-premises footprint, which is important for our clients' environments.

The most valuable features include

• multi-bot architecture
• UiPath Studio
• Test Manager.

It is easy to build automations with this solution as well. We are able to implement end-to-end automation.

There are also build connectors for Salesforce and SAP. Before the connectors, we could only automate the GUI. Now, it is very easy to integrate on the back end as well.

The UiPath Academy courses are also helpful. When a feature or release comes out, they demonstrate them in the Academy.

And if there are any issues, the UiPath community forum helps us to check whether others are also facing these issues. There are a lot of benefits from that.

For some of the cognitive features we have to learn the integration side. Other than that, everything is fine.

I have been using UiPath for nearly three years.

The LTS version is very stable.

It is also definitely scalable. I would recommend it for any size of company, from small to large. For example, if a small company only needs UiPath Studio, they can have it. They don't need UiPath Orchestrator. They can run things with Studio only. There are a lot of options with UiPath.

Their support is good to have, especially for priority issues. 

One thing that would be helpful is if the support team could quickly help us when we raise a ticket. It takes them at least one or two hours to get back to us. With Automation Anywhere, if there is a Severity 1 issue, their support responds within 15 minutes.

Positive

Setting it up is very easy.

The amount of time it takes depends on the client's security requirements. Some teams have restrictions and documentation on how things should be done. But once everything has been verified, deployment will take one to two hours.

Once it's deployed, it's the validation checks that take some time but it depends upon the project: the supporting files and checking that all the integrations are correctly mapped.

In terms of project deployment, we generally have three people involved. One of them will completely handle monitoring and supporting, as well as the Control Room and any logs or administrative tasks. The other two handle change requests.

As for maintenance, our setup is on-premises and we have an internal team that takes care of situations when the server is down. They will restart it and do patch updates, which they will inform us about.

We are using the Enterprise version. We are exploring using it in the cloud, but some of our banking clients do not accept the cloud because of security issues so we go for on-prem only in those cases.

We are not fully using UiPath's AI functionality but we are doing some PoCs, based on our clients' requirements, to check the feasibility. For that, we are using the Community Edition. As for UiPath speeding up digital transformation, I'm not sure. It depends on the process involved.

Overall, I don't see a need for any additional features. I don't have any difficulty using UiPath.

I did a proof of concept for a music industry client. It went well, and the client adopted UiPath. 

UiPath improved lots of features, like sequencing, recording, etc.

I had some issues with the ERP Automation features, and the setup is complex. 

UiPath is stable. 

UiPath projects are highly scalable. There are lots of customization options and ways to easily scale your existing bots. 

I haven't contacted UiPath support because the solution is stable and doesn't require support in most cases. The UiPath community is strong, and you can find answers from multiple places online. 

As a project consultant, I analyze the client's applications and set up everything for them. The initial setup is time-consuming. UiPath involves a longer setup process than other RPA tools.

I rate UiPath a five out of ten for affordability. UiPath costs a bit more than other tools like Blue Prism and Automation Anywhere. 

I rate UiPath a seven out of ten. UiPath offers many customization options. I would recommend it to clients who want to do high-quality processes and complex use cases. You also must consider your budget because the license cost is a little higher than average. 

I'm using UiPath for personal use. I'm trying to create an application in which all the work can be automated, such as financial, HR, and educational-related work so that we can have easy access to the details of candidates.

I'm using it for a small edge case and UiPath is able to solve it in a great way.

I'm very happy with the automation because it gives me more freedom to make things work on my projects.

With UiPath I have been able to increase productivity because the manual work has been reduced and everything is now automated with NLT and ML techniques. We aren't required to go into the specific aspects of every document. We get systemized documents that we can go through and get the details. The NLT is a major part of it for me because it can sense the text and make it more useful for me. It converts it in a way that I don't have to go through all the details.

It has reduced errors in a drastic way and that is something I really appreciate in UiPath. I would estimate the reduction at nearly 25 percent. Before, we were doing this work manually and it took a lot of hours. Now it has been reduced by 10 times and maybe more than that.

I like the automation tool in UiPath that helps in creating the bots. It helps me a lot in getting details from documents. Also, the ML/NLT models are good because they help with data recognition.

Creating automation is pretty simple. Everything is clearly mentioned. And the UiPath team has helped a lot with the learning curve. The user community is very helpful in solving issues. You can find different channels and YouTube videos for details. In terms of community, UiPath is doing great.

Many of the features were very complex in the beginning but with some experience, it has become a great tool for me.

I have been using UiPath for about six months.

It's stable.

We haven't required technical support because the community is very strong and every problem and solution is already there. And the UiPath solution team is also very strong.

Positive

We did not have a previous solution.

We took our time with the deployment. It was a planned activity and it was very straightforward. We didn't face any issues. We spent time reading the documentation and going through the videos about how to deploy things. The entire activity took some days, but the deployment, specifically, took around three or four hours. There were two of us involved.

There is a little maintenance. Sometimes we have to manage the storage and other things, but it's nothing major.

The pricing is fine and the features are good. Still, the pricing could be a little lower. With tools like AI/ML, if the pricing can be reduced, everyone will be able to adopt it.

I would recommend UiPath. For us, it solved our use cases, and we are really happy with it.

We have very restricted usage, primarily around integration situations where we don't have any APIs. We primarily want to do just unattended automation. We discourage attended automation at this time. We have ten to twenty processes happening right now.

The improvements we've seen are primarily around the time and cost savings that surround someone sitting and manually syncing data between SaaS platforms. Although we use the latest and greatest SaaS platforms, they still don't have to interact with each other. There are no APIs in most cases. In those situations, rather than having someone manually sit and do it or have the product vendor customize it, we use UiPath.

For example, a couple of automations save us at least a year's worth of manual effort. Day in and day out, there is a SaaS platform that creates new data, and that needs to go through the different SaaS platforms. And that's the major statement we have. Then there are a few legacy applications we have that are near end of life. We don't intend to bring new APIs to them. Instead, we use UiPath.

I personally use the Academy often, and I have encouraged a couple of .NET developers within the organization to take up the certification. We have system integrators and local offshore vendors. They don't have certification right now. However, I am encouraging them to get certified. They're using UiPath Academy.

For me, the biggest win for the Academy was around the infrastructure and the sales switch around it. In my role, I'm required to go and talk to business functions and technology leaders. I have to tell them what the product can do, how it is deployed, etc., at the level of ownership. Plus, thought leadership needs to come from me, and those academic courses help me a lot.

The user community is definitely robust. I see lots of contributions, and people are willing to come and respond to any posted queries. 

The key reason we are not able to adopt it fully compared to other customers is the security model. Usually, what happens is whenever we talk to a business stakeholder, the first concern is data security. The moment that you talk about a bot in an unattended fashion going and reading the data source, concerns arise since there's not much control at a certain point.

Security remains a concern. We have completed all our security assessments. However, that continues to be a key question. There are use cases that are based out of Europe. If we have an instance in North America, again, the question of GDPR and all those questions arise. For example, does that mean that we have to have multiple tenants in different geographies? We are still trying to solve those kinds of questions.

There are situations in the community where, due to the fact that the product is so rapidly evolving, lots of the content out there is outdated. It leads to that lost effort when you try to do what they're saying, and it doesn't work due to it being a different version. That's probably one problem that I have noticed so far.

I've used the solution for a little over three years.

The stability of the product is very good. 

If you look at the key components and the visuals, I mean the Studio, the Bot, and the Orchestrator, the Bot and the Studio are within our environment. We haven't experienced any issues. What is left is the Orchestrator, and we haven't seen any outages so far.

I don't have any concerns with scaling.

I haven't created too many support requests. That said, the most recent one did not go well. The engineer had some trouble understanding, and the issue is still ongoing.

It wouldn't be fair for me to judge their support just based on those one or two tickets I worked on. I'm sure they have a good team. It was just that one ticket did not work out.

This was our first RPA tool. 

I was involved in the development and deployment. 

The virtual machine setup and the Robot and Orchestrator connection definitely were a little challenging. However, in the current version of the application, Orchestrator, it's far more seamless. Three years ago, it definitely was not that straightforward. Everything has gotten easier. 

The first automation took between three to six months, from initial procurement and development to deployment.

I did the deployment myself. 

In terms of ROI, we are getting there. It's not like as good as I anticipated. That said, we are getting there.

The pricing is fairly decent. It was not crazy expensive. Their cloud deployment gives you that sweet spot in pricing. You don't have to spend $20,000 for the Orchestrator, for example.

We assessed all the market leaders and did a couple of proofs of concept. It turned out that UiPath checked all the boxes from a capability standpoint and user-friendly developer experience, plus the deployment experience. UiPath was a clear leader.

We do not use UiPath AI functionality in our automation program. At this time, it is limited to OCR capabilities.

We currently are unable to automate more complex or involved processes. It is still in the conceptualization phase. We haven't put it into production yet. However, we are exploring their invoice management capabilities and more.

We have yet to develop some sort of social responsibility initiative using UiPath. However, we might in the future. 

I would invite potential users to look at the library of activities that are there. Make sure that the kind of use cases that they're looking at are present, and the level of security that they are looking for in terms of data. If you have less intensive security challenges, it's a no-brainer to use UiPath in the cloud. However, it might get a little tricky if it turns out to be healthcare or anything of that sort. You'll have to work with your data protection team.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten.