UiPath Platform Reviews

The use of this solution is spread out across our organization. On the IT side, we use it for synoptic notes like admission process, reviewing invoices and giving usage access.

The insights that this solution provides have been most valuable. We use these insights to report to higher management on the performance of our processes. 

UiPath also helps us reduce manual work although we do not yet use UiPath's AI functionality. We have learned a lot from the UiPath community and gained knowledge about future products and enhancements. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them.

I have been using this solution for six years. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The support for this solution is tedious. I would rate it a five out of ten. If we don't respond or the ticket closes, we do not get a response from them. We then need to go through the process again and reopen a ticket with the same information.

I have a little bit of experience using Automation Anywhere, but I prefer UiPath. The coding with Automation Anywhere was not developer friendly. 

Our whole team was new to this solution so there was a learning curve involved for all of us which made the setup difficult at times. At this stage, UiPath was one or two years old with limited documentation. The deployment did not take long.

We deployed this solution with the help of a partner called Ernst & Young.

We have experienced a return on investment using the solution as it has led to three million in savings since we started using it. 

We would prefer it if the licences were packaged together. When it comes to developer licences, we need to pay to transfer licences when a developer leaves and this also creates additional work for our IT team. 

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I would recommend UiPath to others because it is a good tool and has a lot of potential to expand. 

UiPath offers direct integrations with multiple platforms that we need, like Google Drive, Slack, Visio, etc. For Slack, UiPath automates the process when we upload a new file, document, or a new version of it. It automatically sends an email or any other sources that we automate through it. That is our main use case.

We upload a lot of content for our website or internal work on Google Drive. When a team member uploads content, we do not get a notification from Google Drive that a document has been uploaded by someone unless they share it. With UiPath, we have automated it so if someone uploads a document in a Google Drive folder, we get an email on a certain email address that a document has been uploaded. Or, when there is a version change, we also get an email. So, we have automated these kinds of processes using UiPath.

It is mainly the automation process for internal tasks. All our direct integrations are for internal work, mainly email triggers that we built using UiPath. These are very useful.

The direct integrations are most valuable. You can directly link your account to multiple platforms, such as Google Drive and Visio, without using an API.

We have used the Orchestrator's trigger creation workflow to create multiple triggers for our automation processes.

It could be improved with tutorials or documentation-wise. Some of the features of the artificial intelligence or Orchestrator have been a little confusing for me. So, I would like an easy YouTube video tutorial or quick demo call. It would be much better for every user if they could introduce that.

Around six to seven months ago, I started using UiPath.

UiPath has always been up so stability is not a problem.

It is really scalable, even for large businesses. We are pretty small, but as you grow, UiPath has great options for scaling up.

We currently have two people using it: the co-founder and me.

I haven't needed to contact their support yet.

We previously used basic process automation platforms.

We switched to UiPath because it offered better features that we needed. For example, its direct integrations are pretty useful. It has every integration that we directly need so we don't need to use APIs or code anything. It is simple and direct. That is the main reason that we use UiPath.

It was straightforward from the process of registering your account to creating an organization, then doing the integrations. The process was really easy and did not take too much time the first time. I think it took us an hour to deploy.

We are on the Community plan, so it has great return on investment.

UiPath has saved our staff time. Using the automation of UiPath, it triggers an email or notification for a process that we have created. This keeps us informed at all times. However, if we don't use it, content may get missed and we would lose a lot of opportunities.

The pricing is good. They offer a Community edition that we currently use, which is free. Their paid pricing is pretty affordable for businesses as well.

I went to review websites and saw that UiPath is great.

In case you are not going to drag and drop APIs, they should definitely go and have a look at direct integration. 

I would rate the solution as nine out of 10.

I'm a consultant. Right now, I work on supply chain coordination. I have also used UiPath for finances, for building reports for engineering, and for human resources departments.

The solution is on-premises, but we are migrating to the cloud.

The solution helps a lot when we are dealing with big companies where governance is a must. We can have multiple centers of excellence at different places in the company. UiPath is easy to deploy and easy to manage for such companies as we can centralize a lot of things in one place.

For example, with Orchestrator not only can we monitor all the bots and processes, but it helps in the development phase as well. If we want to have custom libraries that solve specific problems for the company, we can create those custom libraries and share them throughout the organization. This helps a lot when it comes to governance, compared to other automation solutions.

I created a project based on attended automation and it was successful in helping the user. It was a bot to create engineering reports and the user was able to implement it on a daily basis. I have a positive view of attended automations. Having said that, unattended bots are preferable because we want most of the processes to be automated, end-to-end, and not require the user to start them. We use attended robots only when there is no other solution. So attended bots are not as relevant as unattended robots, in my experience.

In addition, because the user did not need to create that report anymore, he could focus on more analytical thinking. That is something that I always say when starting an RPA project. Users become freer to do analytical thinking and not robotic thinking where they just click here and there and move some Excel files. I would estimate it saved them five to eight hours a week.

In a lot of the projects I have worked on, reducing human error was one of the priorities for the automation. When working with human resources, for example, reports could go wrong if the user did not create them properly. This could cause the company to have to pay fees. Automating those reports reduced the risk to zero and helped with compliance.

UiPath also reduces the overall costs of automation operations. Although it's more expensive as a solution when compared to other vendors, because it's a very consistent application and there is really good support from the UiPath team, it is the fastest when it comes to developing and deploying automation. It is surely the most reliable in the long term. That's where UiPath is at the top.

The best feature, for sure, is the ease of development. It's very easy to create an automation from scratch. Time to production is really fast when everything is already set up and we have a clear view of what needs to be done. UiPath has a more friendly development environment compared to other vendors of RPA.

And the Task Capture feature helps implement end-to-end automation starting with process analysis. Task Capture helps us map a business process from start, and it can generate code in UiPath's Studio development platform. If you use it correctly, it definitely helps.

And with Orchestrator, we can keep watch over all the executions and also create easy integrations with BI tools like Power BI and Tableau, if I need some extra analysis on the data that is being processed. Orchestrator provides everything that I need for monitoring.

Although they add a lot of enhancements every month to the solution in general, they could focus more on UiPath Studio. I would like to see them add more features for developers who have a deeper understanding of programming languages. 

They could also make it easier to integrate custom-made functions.

One of the downsides of Automation Cloud, and this is more an issue related to the Community version, is that they always place the newest features on the Community version. I have experienced some issues when implementing automations on that version because things can change from one day to another. Some of these changes can impact automations that were running. But when it comes to the Enterprise version, things are very stable. They will never change things like that from one day to the next.

I've been using UiPath for about three years.

It's pretty stable. I have never gotten errors on the connection between the bots, Orchestrator, and Studio. 

The errors I have found are generally related to the network or to a virtual machine with fewer resources than the minimum requirements. 

The overall execution of the automations is pretty fast, even when dealing with high volumes of data from Excel files, compared to VBA or another scripting tool.

I have opened tickets with UiPath and they have helped me a lot in solving the issues. I have never had major issues with support. If I need to open an urgent ticket, I get a response on the same day. They call me to solve the issue together with them, if needed.

It's also really good that UiPath has a strong community. They started the idea of sharing new features and engaging the community. That has definitely helped UiPath to be on the list of the top vendors. There were times when I reached out to the community and they were very fast in helping me solve a question or get through an error. The community, for me, is one of the differences when compared to other RPA vendors.

Positive

I have not worked with other solutions at an enterprise level. I have looked at them just to understand how they work and to see if they could serve my purposes better than UiPath.

The on-premises setup takes some time because we have to implement Orchestrator among other things. Generally, it's very fast. Sometimes there are issues, things like application and environment access, but they're usually more related to the customer that I'm working with. Overall, if everything is good to go, installation and configuration can be done in a day.

I worked with a national company on an on-premises solution and it took four hours to install Orchestrator, and one to two hours more to implement UiPath Studio and the UiPath robot. It was really straightforward with no configuration errors. Using the right versions of Windows Server and the virtual machines, the ones that UiPath recommends, helps everything go smoothly.

When working with a customer that is just starting to use RPA, I usually pick all the recommendations for installation and configuration from the UiPath vendor website. I then add some extra tips on configuring the Windows Server and ask the customer to provide the environments. That gives me access to everything that I need. 

There can always be additional details to deal with, but they are usually errors to do with infrastructure, permissions, or proxy configuration on the customer's side. These are usually things that they did not mention, and then we have to reconfigure things. But if I don't know how to handle them I can usually find a UiPath tutorial where they teach you how. UiPath always provides the knowledge that I need to implement the solution.

UiPath speeds up digital transformation. When dealing with a customer's first RPA implementation, and they are comparing UiPath with other vendors, the downside of UiPath is always the price because it's the most expensive platform. However, it is the fastest and most reliable. The community is great. The support is great. So it definitely speeds up the digital transformation process a lot.

When customers are comparing tools, we focus on the strong points of UiPath. For example, it's the least expensive over the long term because it's very reliable, and we are not going to spend too much time on the development. The development is always faster when compared to other tools.

If customers are only looking at the initial price for implementing RPA, they may go with other vendors. I have seen this happen a couple of times. When this is the case we will usually want to use the least expensive license possible from UiPath. For example, when a company has only one unattended robot, they will try to put multiple processes on the same robot before jumping to buy another robot and expanding the overall architecture.

Some things can be done with open-source tools, but they lack governance when implementing automation on a large scale. When we talk about scaling the solution, a solution like UiPath is the clearest choice.

Free automation tools are not going to be as easy to deploy and scale as UiPath.

When we are developing RPA projects for digital transformation, we want to provide a solution that is reliable and fast. UiPath helps on both of those counts. It enables us to implement automation in a fast, secure, and reliable way.

I have worked on some projects with UiPath Automation Cloud, but mostly using the same tools as usual. I didn't take too much advantage of what the cloud provides, compared to other projects, but it's easier to manage if a company needs to start from scratch. With Automation Cloud you don't have as much to maintain, such as handling an on-premises server. It also definitely helps for keeping things updated.

With everything centralized on Automation Cloud, it's very easy when it comes to a higher level of governance. For example, if I want to manage the licensing between Orchestrators, and create different tenants and manage the access between those tenants, that is all very easy to do. UiPath gives you a very clean interface.

A SaaS solution helps a lot when working on projects for many of our customers because they do not have any RPA infrastructure. They are often starting their first project and a SaaS solution has everything centralized. They can just buy one license for attended or unattended robots and start from there. It's great for the customers because they only need to worry about a virtual machine in their environment. We create a minimum viable product more efficiently because we don't have to worry about the configuration of their own Orchestrator and the like.

Also, when they want to scale, Automation Cloud will be much easier.

I keep myself updated on the news from UiPath and they are starting to implement serverless robots on the cloud. I don't know if this is already available in the Enterprise version, but when it comes out, companies do want to implement it because they won't even need to worry about an on-premises virtual machine. Everything will be in the cloud.

I started my learning about UiPath from the Academy. It's very good and very insightful, and the questions and exercises are everything that you need to learn how to automate using UiPath Studio or any other tool.

The Academy is a must for starting with RPA using UiPath. There are some other courses online in other learning platforms, but UiPath already provides everything that you need to start an RPA career. Not only can you learn the developer's role, but also the role of a business analyst and solution architect. It gives you an understanding of all the steps involved in creating and managing automations.

The certification is also very important. At the time I did the certification, it was free. It's very valuable for someone starting out who wants to get an RPA job.

We implement automation for clients to create savings by cutting the number of FTEs. We've used UiPath for various kinds of automation, including mainframes, browsers, Excel, account payables and receivables, fixed assets, healthcare projects, HR projects, reporting robots, and IT services projects. 

Recently, we did a massive US taxation project that spanned eleven months and covered enterprise and individual taxation extensions. It was a huge project that yielded a lot of savings. 

If I want to leverage a specific UiPath use case, I build small use cases around that particular feature and try to envision a product out of it. I've had several hackathons and general discussion calls because I'm a solution architect. Everybody wants to work on apps, and UiPath is comparable to the blank canvas apps that Microsoft PowerApps provides. 

When we had an automation program that involved 200-plus automations, we created around 100-plus libraries, saving us thousands of hours of development time. UiPath is designed to save time. The object repository was liberating because it enabled us to move from simple to extendable libraries. UiPath's apps increase our business by helping us leverage the UI layer in a way we couldn't in the past.

It gives us the ability to share data between systems in healthcare applications.. However, it's still tricky because so many system controls are in place. That's not a limitation of UiPath per se, but every department has restrictions on passing data to other departments. They have their own due diligence in place, limiting data flow from one system to another. UiPath gives us the fluidity and freedom to do it, but the limitations within each domain often get in the way.

Let's use claims data, for example. The data regulation team won't be too keen on allowing the marketing department to use data from the claims division to generate new business. The data flow from one department to another isn't that fluid. Organizational controls rather than system controls bind it.

We should look at each separately in terms of AI and machine learning. If we want to do data analysis, we have to call an inverse Python script, which is a little difficult. However, we can host our own model, and that's good. The ability to use that opened some doors. 

At the same time, it's helpful to have out-of-the-box features like Document Understanding and an ML passer there. The integration is quite fluid. We can directly call a Document Understanding model and then give it to ML passer and then get the results out. It's smoother for integration. The client has to focus on one particular software or multi-stack that they're comfortable with. UiPath has opened some opportunities in that sense. It made life easier because the capability is sitting inside the platform itself. 

UiPath is a separate solution, but it can talk to other services and doesn't restrict you to the passer, but that's how the ML features within Document Understanding help us. Custom model hosting and the AI center also help. We don't have to host the custom model somewhere else and call that service then pass it and do the post-processing within the system. It isn't a third-party service, so we know it's sitting within the system. If any issues are also there, we know where to diagnose and deposit them.

UiPath Orchestrator is a treasure, and UiPath Studio includes various packages to integrate with solutions like Salesforce, ServiceNow, and Excel. They also have mainframes, web automation, and the API package. 

Orchestrator contains a lot of useful apps, data services, and machine templates. From a usability perspective, the most valuable aspects are its custom activities, libraries, and object repositories. In terms of integration, I like the ability to use APIs and call automations from UiPath apps. The most valuable feature from a human-in-the-loop perspective is the action center. 

Our customers appreciate the support that UiPath provides, and they don't want to go with a third-party vendor like Microsoft Visio, Form Recognizer, or Google Cloud. They're hesitant because some integration is required. The lead times for closing queries are longer with third-party vendors. For instance, it takes me about two or three weeks to set up Document Understanding in my project. But it took us three months to establish Form Recognizer with a client.  

In addition to the out-of-the-box functionality UiPath provides, it can host our custom models. That's something that comes in handy when we need a custom model. So far, we haven't taken it to production yet, but we are still baselining the technology. At the moment, we are doing a baseline project where we try to perform four POCs simultaneously. We are baselining Google Cloud Platform, Azure, and AWS with UiPath's AI center and machine learning services and comparing the four.

UiPath's performance could be improved. UiPath's framework was built on top of .NET Core. It was a 32-bit platform initially, but they recently introduced a 64-bit version. Let's say I have a huge machine with 64 gigs of RAM. If I have a server machine and want to use multi-threading to extend my automation and multitask, the design won't allow me. I can't separate things into multiple processes. 

The platform is designed to go step by step. Parallel activities are not truly parallel, but it creates the impression that it's running in parallel. For example, if you're on the left segment within a parallel activity, and there is some wait time, it doesn't stay there. It goes to the middle and then to the right. It schedules tasks based on a time-to-completion window and then takes them from end to end. 

UiPath optimizes the time and doesn't let the CPU idle, but it doesn't give you multi-threading or asynchronous methodologies. These are available in the C# and .NET framework but absent in this platform. It's a step-by-step process where you go through each activity. A casual developer or coder who wants to leverage UiPath should be able to. I'm not saying that the working code is not there, but it's quite basic. It doesn't support functions or asynchronous methodology. 

UiPath is attempting to make it easier for a citizen developer to automate processes. They don't have to know how to code, but a citizen developer can't do it when the use case becomes more complex. When they advertise that one doesn’t need to know coding to program bots, that's only true for easy or intermediate use cases. We still need a programmer for anything beyond medium complexity.

The marketing could be improved because the methodologies went from waterfall COE to an automated operation model. However, people are trying to do automation in an Agile model, but it's not exactly executable that way. When customers see the demos from UiPath, they expect that the results will be significant, and they are. However, we might try to automate something, and we’re unsure whether it can be automated because there's a gray area. There's always a 20 to 30 percent chance automation might fail. And that gray area is something that I want UI to focus on.

They have tried this with StudioX by adding checklists. The industry is not following this practice, though. I'm not sure how they should ensure that it gets followed within the platform, but the delivery model needs to improve. It's still niche. 

Another thing to consider is the work-life balance of the developer and the solution architect. The overall challenge of automation tends to become exponentially complex over time. For example, let's look at one aspect: the account tables. I can go to the account tables from a simple PDF perspective. The PDF is readable by the board, and the solution can extract all the data and do the account tables within SAP or Ariba and mix all of it and then submit a report to the business.

This can be extended to intelligent document processing using form recognizer and custom models, then passers, pre-processing, post-processing, and sending the report to the business. The complexity of it can be extended quite a lot. There should be a framework or methodology in place to hedge the bet so that it's not too complex and doesn't disrupt the life of a developer, solution architect, or business analyst. 

If the automation becomes too complex and challenging, our support team won't be able to sustain it in the long run. Once the development team is gone, the automation will die two or three months down the line. It's a balance to manage the complexity and extent of our automation.  

We've been using UiPath for a little more than four years. 

Resource utilization is one area where UiPath is lacking. UiPath says that the solution will run fine on a machine with four gigs of RAM, and they recommend horizontal scaling, but I suggest a mix of horizontal and vertical scaling. 

I've seen implementations on giant machines with high-density VMs and five users logged into the same VM. Therefore, the resource utilization isn't optimal. The RAM and CPU are not completely utilized. It only executes processes on a segment of the resources. I think that can improve. 

I rate UiPath's support nine out of ten. UiPath's support is excellent. They triage issues based on severity, and there is a clearly defined close time and lead time. Their support engineers will follow up with you 24/7 over phone, SMS, or email. 

The scope of support isn't limited to problems with the UiPath platform. We can reach out to UiPath if we are having problems automating a third-party application. They will help us if they have experience with the app. If they don't have experience, they baseline the issue and go through the log to do whatever they can to help us. We've had a great experience with UiPath's support, and our clients feel the same. Support is one reason UiPath is dominating the market. 

Positive

Most of the RPA solutions are fairly similar. The inspiration for UiPath's object repository was taken from Blue Prism. UiPath's integration services are like the connectors in Microsoft Power Platform. I'm not saying that UiPath is exactly copying everybody, but they're taking the best features from every solution and bringing them in-house. 

Other platforms are dominating in some areas. For example, Power Apps is more mature than UiPath Apps. I'm trying to add value based on my experience, and Power Platform's connectors should also bring value to UiPath. In the end, it shouldn't be redundant.

Every time we deploy the solution, we use an automation operation model. It's a massive document with policies defined on every level, from design to development, UATS, prods, escalations, business, teams, team leads, Agile boards, and reporting. 

All of that is documented from the start. We use that model to layout deliverables needing to be fulfilled. Once deployment progresses from one step to another, we have a way to document our progress. We've gone from a theoretical model to a UI model. It's not purely Agile or KanBan, though Agile framework and KanBan breakdown structures are there. However, it doesn't follow a scrum methodology. 

We're not on a two or three-week release cycle. One sprint is the entire use case from build to development and then from development to UAT to production. It's a custom delivery model, and it's working. Still, I feel it can be improved. 

Our clients have seen significant returns using UiPath, but their marketing could be improved. 

I'm aware of how UiPath's pricing compares to other tools, but it's hard because the offerings are different. It's not apples and oranges per se, but it's comparing an average tool to an excellent one. UiPath provides enormous value, so the licensing is justified.

I rate UiPath nine out of ten. It isn't perfect, but they constantly improve and surprise me. At the moment, I give it a nine, but it might be eight in the future. If you feel like some process will cause a lot of headaches, position it later in the cycle of automation. If you can save resources by automating, you should go for it, but you should be smart when deciding your use cases.

If you're thinking about implementing UiPath, I recommend having a design team that understands automation. You need people with some experience who know how automation is done. It requires some business analysts with at least a month of experience on UiPath from a citizen developer perspective. It would help quite a lot in terms of establishing automations that are relatively complex. Try an 80-20 approach operating principle when planning your automation.

The solution is used for automating repetitive processes within our entire organization.

In this particular organization, we've been running UiPath for roughly one year, and we've already been able to automate so many tasks that the solution has been enough to replace two individuals.

The ease of implementation is great. There's a large community surrounding this product. UiPath, in their workflow wheel of products, offers a really wide variety. I've tried competitors as well and I would say that they are market-leading.

My assessment of the ease of building automation using the solution is positive. There are a lot of different techniques or coding languages that can be used for automation. UiPath provides software where, instead of dragging from the ground up, I can drag and drop prebuilt functions that will shorten the development cycles. Rather than having to build something, I can just reuse something that somebody else already built.

The solution enables us to implement end-to-end automation, starting with process analysis and rebooting building, and monitoring of automation. They strive to provide all of those. The monitoring part is quite lacking, however, they are a quality provider in other aspects.

The cloud is great. I worked in organizations where we hosted UiPath on-premises, and not having to take care of updates or worry about the on-premises server, is a great help.

The Automation Cloud service helped decrease time to value. Rather than focusing on infrastructure, our focus is purely on finely automating our computers and development.

I’m not sure if the Automation Cloud service helps to decrease the solution's total cost of ownership. I’m not exactly sure how the privacy model is looked at right now if I compare the cloud service to the on-premise service.

In terms of having a SaaS solution and how fast we’re able to innovate when it comes to automation, in this particular case, the main selling point is that they have a really wide variety of automation-related products, which makes them the all-in-one automation vendor.

This solution helps minimize our on-premise footprint.

We’ve used the UiPath Academy Courses. We have got both developers and business people using it. This way, they can gain more insight into what is good to look out for when trying to identify automation. It's a very important part of UiPath. They offer everything from videos and other tools, which makes our team of experts not need to study anywhere else.

The community is quite good and brings value. They have authority. There are a lot of people who answer questions. UiPath has done a really good job in terms of showcasing the people that spent the most time there, giving them MVP statuses and more.

The biggest benefit of the Academy is that people get up to speed quite quickly with UiPath's suite of products. The only thing I can compare it to are open source alternatives. I haven't used any of the proprietary alternatives.

We use Attended Automation. Attended Automation helped to scale RPA benefits in our organization by automating department or role-specific processes that require human-robot collaboration. It has been a good way to explain to the business what RPA is. They can actually see if the solutions align and they gain a better understanding of the bigger picture. It's very important. At the end of the day, business is the most important place that we get automation ideas from. They need to know the potential of the product and Attended Automations helps them gain this insight.

While the solution speeds up digital transformation, I cannot say it necessarily reduces the cost of digital transformation. It has, however, reduced human error. Some of the processes that we have to automate are very repetitive, and when we must repeat this five thousand times a day, mistakes are bound to happen. However, if you make a computer program do it, it's more efficient and less error-prone.

This solution freed up employees' time. So far, we freed up almost two weeks of programming delays. If we free up one day, that's 168 hours per month, and doubled it will be roughly 340 hours per month. This additional time enabled employees to focus on higher-value work.

We haven't measured employee satisfaction in a granular way, however, from just what I've heard, teams are very satisfied that they no longer have to do these really boring tasks.

This solution reduced the cost of our automation operations, although we didn't really do automation before. This solution saved costs for our organization in general as well.

Monitoring and statistics need improvement. It's quite hard to export if you want a long, clear report. It's quite hard to do that based on the style and functionality. You have to feed in your own functionality to do this.

I've been working with UiPath for the past three years.

The stability of the solution is good. We've had heaps of fun since we implemented UiPath one year ago.

If we need to increase the computing power, in this case, it would be adding more robot licenses. We can simply do that by emailing UiPath and they will expand our license. It’s very simple to scale up.

The solution is scalable. It's very easy and quick to scale up. If we need more people for more robots, then we can simply just buy another robot license.

We use the one robot license and we have it at roughly 70%. We will probably buy another robot at the end of this year.

Technical support is great. I've used it on several occasions and I can expect answers within twenty four hours from their technical engineers, and they will speak with me directly.

Positive

We used an open-source program called OpenRPA. UiPath is a much bigger suite of products with a big community. We get a lot of services for free when we're using UiPath.

The initial setup was extremely straightforward. We sent one email and they set it up for us.

The deployment took roughly one month, and the installer set it up for us. It's more of a matter of informing and educating the business.

Our implementation strategy was to demo the product for a business, explain the capabilities, give them the information about UiPath Academy, and then based on that, move forward.

We handle the implementation in-house. 

We have seen a return on investment. In less than one year, we had already automated many tasks and saved time in terms of hours, manual hours, and days.

As long as your company has enough repetitive work where you can automate, the pricing is quite easy to calculate. If you save more money automating these tasks in the first half-year, then it's definitely a worthwhile investment.

You should take into account the different server where you actually run the product with a Windows license and the cost of purchasing the machine.

We evaluated the top five market options based on Gartner, and based on previous experience with consultants and colleagues. We then picked this solution.

The pros of UiPath compared to, for example, Automation Anywhere or Power Automate, which was my first alternative, was that they have a larger community. They also have a wider range of products. They have a wider range of activities within the products as well. They have in general, a stronger tool. UiPath is very broad.

We do not use the solution's Automation Cloud service.

We do not use this solution as much as we would like to, however, we use monitors with the Automation Hub to gather all different types of automation IBS in one place. All of our products are hosted on the Automated Cloud.

At this point, we do not use the solution's UiPath app features or the AI functionality in our automation program.

I'd advise users to follow best practices in regard to populating automation. It's a good idea to follow people's advice. You aren't going to make the wrong decision if other people have done it before.

I'd rate the solution a strong seven out of ten. The only lacking parts I can mention are the monitoring and statistics.

My primary use case is automation. I worked in multiple companies with the same product on the same profile, and most of them were automation. The actual business use case would vary from company to company, and project to project as well.

One feature that I personally found valuable was the orchestrator. It is a pretty mature platform as of now, and it was three to four years back when I started to first use it. It has matured quite well. They had a major change a couple of years back. Our company transitioned from an older approach to a newer modern approach that they deployed. The orchestrator platform was very well-suited to the new approach - as was the development studio. It's really easy to use and intuitive. That has matured quite well as far as I can tell. These two are what I liked the most about the product.

UiPath’s ease of use and quick deployment times were great as the cloud orchestrator, which did not need much of a setup.

To build automation using UiPath is fairly simple. The studio is quite easy to use. Even now, with the community edition, it’s great. If we want to learn to start or try out something, we do not have to wait for licenses or anything else. That said, we can also get an enterprise trial. If we want to do something, learn something, even during our personal time, we can just download it. They also provide a free orchestrator version as well, so it becomes quite easy to learn and develop. 

The building, deployment, and manual deployment processes, for small-scale projects, are very easy. If we need to build something, we just publish it, and it generates the NuGet package. It's very easy to deploy there.

The materials and the training courses are all pretty well-structured to get started with.

UiPath Academy courses have assisted in the process of getting our team up to speed. The basics were there even when I started out. I was not initially an RPA developer. I was into server operations before this. The UiPath Academy training really helped a lot with the initial courses, where they give you a tour of the platform and each and every activity. For audiences who are not much into software development, these courses can guide them towards that. The building blocks got us up to speed. They have very good courses there.

Regarding the Academy, it is a great learning platform for basic tasks. However, for more complex information, I turn to UiPath Forum. Sometimes I need some Python or C# scripts or am building custom libraries there. That gets shifted onto different platforms like Stack Overflow. We Google other platforms as well for the other types of queries.

UiPath Forum is a pretty good place in terms of the user community. Most of the queries that are posted generally get answered. Sometimes, even for smaller issues, we do not go directly into UiPath support and we first try to resolve the issues via what we find in the UiPath Community. Overall, it’s a pretty good place to solve our issues, and the community as of now is pretty active.

We saved time in our IT department since we started to use this solution. UiPath handles infrastructure for the orchestrator and its maintenance. There's a pretty good amount of time saved as we had initially had a server on-prem deployment as well. However, it became cumbersome to deploy multiple databases and they have some Elasticsearch requirements and security updates that need to be regularly maintained and in sync with UiPath. Due to this infrastructure overhead, our time could be consumed maintaining everything. Without them handling the infrastructure, we'd be maintaining instead of building automations and deploying them. We realized that an automation cloud would be a better option which is why we switched.

UiPath reduced human error. That said, we do not track errors in the process. It's a good metric to track as well, however, we currently do not track it.

It reduced employees’ time on certain tasks. The main purpose of automation is to save us the number of hours that the project will take. There are many other parameters, however, the time saved is one of the big ones. 

A weakness with Academy is that, with the current updates that they have, the newer updates, the courses are not up to speed. Nowadays, Academy does not feel that intuitive and does not give sufficient information about the product to the customer.

In our current use cases, we do not need much user interaction. One shortcoming with UiPath Apps is that it cannot directly integrate with the orchestrator platform itself. For example, if we need to fetch any assets, values, or cue data from the orchestrator itself, it's basically a web platform. Even if we develop apps and want to do something based on that data, they do not have direct integration with the orchestrator. We need a separate bot, which will then interact with the orchestrator and then pass it back.

If we need ten to fifteen users who might simultaneously use apps, and we want to run a process for each of these users, then we might need fifteen licenses to do that. That is something that has been holding us back from using it, as it does not have direct orchestrator access. We need a separate bot to get the data to perform some actions.

Scaling and licensing need major improvement. I know that they have released something called Serverless Cloud Robots, where the bot machines do not need infrastructure. However, we do not generally want to run the bots or the data in the UiPath cloud as well. There are some hiccups that do happen when we run bots on another machine. That said, it might be a good feature and we can scale up and scale down more effectively.

I've used the solution for nearly four years now.

The stability has been quite good for a couple of quarters now. We had some issues two or three quarters ago, where there was a downtime of around thirty minutes which impacted assessment. After that, for the last couple of quarters, we have not seen any issues regarding the platform itself. It is pretty stable.

The product allows scaling up, however, when we deploy and run the bot, the bot does not actually run on the orchestrator. The orchestrator is just a management platform. When we need to scale up bots, what we would need to do is spin up new virtual machines. We need those virtual machines in order to scale up. This, along with the licensing affects the ability to scale.

If someone does not have a license, it cannot scale up. When comparing it to something like AWS offers, or any other cloud service, where you can rapidly scale up and rapidly scale down based upon our demands, that is currently not possible with the UiPath. We do not get to easily scale up. We need to plan in advance as to when we run our automation, what time we need to offset the loads, and which automation gets priority at that time. That becomes a bit of an issue.

As of now, scaling is a bit cumbersome, whether we are scaling up or down, and the licensing also revolves around scaling.

We use both attended and unattended automation. In the case of attended automation, scaling is a bit tricky. We need to consider licenses. Very few need the same automation to run on one hundred machines. If we do, then we would need to find a way to manage these one hundred licenses as well. It again comes down to cost.

Our thought process is that whenever possible and where we need to scale, we try to avoid human interaction, and we try to convert our bad pieces into attended automation. If some automation requires a manual login due to regulatory compliance or maybe due to capture, what we do is have these login paths that we take in as unattended input. Then where it’s possible, we would run it as an unattended mode and maybe then pass on the output to the attended mode.

We have support from UiPath, however, I'm not sure what model we are on. 

The support is not as responsible as we would expect. It's not bad, but it's not good.

The response time, the overall solutions that they provide, and the workarounds are okay. It's a mix of everything. We've had somewhat of a mixed experience with them.

Neutral

UiPath handles infrastructure, maintenance, and updates for the Automation Cloud - the infrastructure being the orchestrator infrastructure. The robot infrastructure is handled by us.

I was involved in the initial deployment of UiPath in our organization's deployment process. The deployment process is pretty straightforward with automation cloud data, so we did not need to worry about that. The administration is pretty straightforward as well. They have all of these access models, folders, and groupings. It's very easy, even for a new user that needs access to a particular box to run. It's also easy to maintain.

In terms of deployment on the cloud, there is no overhead. The administration process is simple. Maybe it took us around two to three days of initial setup. Most of the time was spent brainstorming on how we would need to structure our use case. That was what took the majority of the time. Once we decided on that, it was pretty easy. It can be done in one day. The process is also ongoing as the requirements change and the roles change, and it always requires some sort of maintenance, taking out users, taking in new users, et cetera. However, that's pretty easy.

In terms of the deployment of individual bots, it is pretty easy. The manual deployment is also pretty simple. We deploy it from the studio. We get a bundle package and we upload it at the studio level as well as the orchestrator, and it's done. This is a straightforward model. We do have a CI/CD pipeline setup for enterprises where we avoid manual deployments. In that case, we do not use UiPath CI/CD. We do use Git and pipelines to push our packages directly to UiPath.

I can't speak to if there has been an ROI or not.

The licensing could be more flexible. They might have a different enterprise cost strategy for each of the licenses. The license is rigid in that you cannot generally scale up. To scale up, we have to have a license procured before we can run a bot there.

I am not involved in the comparison between Uipath and its competitors, such as Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere, or any other platform.

We do not really have clients in healthcare, however, my previous company has mainly evolved into what I can say is a pharmaceutical supply chain. The company is an ordering platform for pharmaceuticals. I'm not sure whether I can consider that as a healthcare pharmaceutical or supply chain use case.

I had done some trial POCs around the UiPath Apps feature. We did some basic trials within our team, however, we do not have any end-users who actively use UiPath Apps.

We're still at an early stage in terms of using AI in our automation via UiPath. We tried out some POCs, and I'm also just getting training on that as well. We do not have any production use cases right now that go into full AI or ML.

In general, they have a good ecosystem of developers. It would be easier to set up and use it. However, if a new company has heavier workloads and needs scaling capability based on time, they’ll need to calculate their requirements. For example, if I process 1,000 to 2,000 transactions per day and I need ten robots to do this and it's fixed every day, then it's fine. That said, if I have varying workloads, where the workload is the last week of the month and the workload is very high, maybe I’ll need twenty or thirty bots to accommodate this workload, while, for the rest of the month, I’ll just need around five bots. That's twenty-five bots that I’ll need to purchase, with many idle most of the time. That is one issue that needs to be planned correctly during the initial stage. 

Overall, I would rate UiPath eight out of ten.

We are a service-based development company and we implement automation for our clients. UiPath is one of the RPA solutions that we use for this.

A recent use case that we implemented for a client involved a macro in an Excel sheet. The macro contained approximately 1,000 lines, and it was being used in an Excel spreadsheet about 10 pages long. They had dropdowns within the sheet that had to be set, depending on the action. They also had to work with some of the logic themselves.

With UiPath, we implemented a solution where the bot will create a task. It first checks to see if all of the necessary conditions are there. If they are, then the bot will automatically run the macro. If instead, some of the values are missing and user input is required, then the bot will create a new task to request the missing items from the user. It uses the UiPath forms and the client will receive an email to say that a task has been created and that it will be completed once the necessary values are selected.

Finally, once all of the values have been selected, the bot will run, use the input, and complete the execution of the macro.

A second use case for us was done using the Action Center. In this case, our clients send emails, and we have API calls that are done in response. Once an email comes in, a message ID is created and assigned to it, then it is turned into a Queue item. At that point, the user is presented with different actions that are dictated by the content of the email.

Depending on the user's selection, there are three or four paths that it can take. Ultimately, the bot will send an ETA and some request data to the appropriate parties, which is controlled by yet another process.

Using UiPath for automation is a little bit costly but it saves a lot of time, and it also reduces human error. When humans perform tasks, there are a lot of errors that come about. However, when a bot performs the same task, the number of errors is significantly reduced. This is the reason that companies are implementing UiPath and undergoing a digital transformation.

In our experience, bots run with minimal errors, in the one or two percentage point range. Of the thousands of items that they process, very few will result in an error. Humans, by contrast, normally have an error rate of 5% or 6%.

It is very easy to develop automation using UiPath, and I would rate it a four out of five in this regard. This is true whether it is IT automation, UI automation, desktop automation, or otherwise. We have even performed Citrix Automation recently, where we used remote runtime. In that case, we had access to a lot of features and this made our work very easy to do.

This product enables us to implement end-to-end automation. Some of our clients use the process mining feature, which includes task capture. Then, based on that, they generate the process design document (PDD). After they have the PDD, the bot is designed using Studio, and then it is ready for deployment. Deploying a bot includes publishing it using Orchestrator, and once it is running, Orchestrator monitors it. From end to end, UiPath is part of the process.

This is important to us because some of our clients are not very technical. They have ideas of what they want to do, so they walk us through the steps in a process. During that time, we will begin using the task capture capability to record what they do, making it easier for us to gather ideas and requirements. The whole process is an easy way to capture good use cases for the client.

Most of our clients are now opting for cloud-based deployment. This is important to them because they don't have to store everything on their on-premises servers. Essentially, they don't have to waste any space.

One of the features that I like is that the bot will continue to work on other tasks, even if one task is blocked because it is waiting for user input. For example, it's very good because whenever we need to have user input, we don't need to use the attended automation. Just because the user is not available to select the actions, it will not break the bot. Rather, the bot will work on other tasks. Once the person manually completes the required action, the bot will resume the pending task.

It is very easy for us to get selectors by using the UI Launch Explorer. I have used other tools that require we visit the webpage and get the selectors manually. This means that we have to inspect the page and find the elements. However, with UiPath, we have the selectors readily available using UI Launch Explorer.

Another good feature is the UiPath Academy. Whenever a new feature is released, we learn about it from the Academy. I would rate it a four out of five in terms of helpfulness for getting employees up to speed. When we review the new courses that they release, we can quickly get a complete idea of the feature that they are presenting.

The UiPath forum is very helpful. It is the best forum available for any of the tools that we have. I would rate the UiPath forum a five out of five.

One of our clients is using the UiPath Apps feature, and although it is easy to use, they are having some issues with it. For example, when they deploy an update, it is pushed to the cloud and then it will break an hour later. There have been two or three such issues and ultimately, they result in a high priority ticket to fix the problem.

I have been working with UiPath for approximately four years.

With respect to stability, the general system is stable. This includes the robots, Automation Cloud, and the Action Center. However, we have had a lot of downtime with UiPath Apps. It had been one or two days per month when our processes were getting blocked and although many of these issues are resolved, last month we had recurring issues with downtime.

The technical support team is very helpful. For anybody with a license, there is an option to raise a ticket based on priority. The support team tries to fix such problems very quickly.

Overall, the support team is very good and I would rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have explored two or more other RPA solutions. One of them is Automation Anywhere, and another is Microsoft Power Automate.

When I explored Power Automate, it didn't have many features. It is a product that is still growing but when I looked at it, UiPath had more features.

In the case of Automation Anywhere, it's a little bit more difficult to work on. As an example, Automation Anywhere does not have ready-made selectors. There is no equivalent to the Ui Launch Explorer so we have to go to the webpage and find the elements by ourselves.

One advantage to Automation Anywhere is that it's a little bit less costly.

Using the Apps feature for one or two of our clients has sped up the time required to develop bots for them. Also, because it is a drag-and-drop interface that only requires a small amount of coding, making it work is much easier.

Our clients dictate the deployment model, whether it is on-premises or cloud-based. One of our clients uses Amazon but the majority of them work using virtual machines that are running on their in-house servers.

The automation saves time and money for our clients, although the amounts vary and are based on the specific solution. As an example, in an email task that we automated, the bots replaced a team of people. On average, the automation saved 28 hours per day for that task.

In general, several hours can be saved per day for each automation.

Due to the reduced costs and other benefits, our clients are ready to create more bots.

UiPath is a little more costly than competing solutions such as Automation Anywhere. 

The cost for licensing is handled by our customers that use the bots.

I have not personally used the AI functionality when creating automations, although some of our clients use features such as Document Understanding for invoice processing. They also use the ML Trainer. These features help them to automate processes that are more complex. For example, when they have 20 or 30 invoices coming in each day, the bot is trained to look at them and it makes the job very easy to do. Also, when the accuracy drops, the bot can wait for input in an attended fashion. This has helped a lot of our clients.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I use it for automating activities and processes in my company, and for discovering new automation opportunities. UiPath is my main tool for automating every process in business operations.

One of my main use cases for UiPath is around service desk and support center operations. I use it to take tickets from customers and users and automate answers using UiPath's machine learning. It links the questions to documentation where we already have answers.

I also use it for automating invoices with the pricing and other information and sending them to customers when they buy an item.

In addition, when somebody subscribes to a newsletter I have set up a process to send an email in reply.

Using the solution we can do task mining and process mining. The automations make everything easier for my business and for the other businesses where I implement them.

For example, one of my use cases is for a doctor's office to help manage the patients by handling their inquiries and automating the invoices. I have also set up processes to help with research and prescriptions. All these processes are automated and run without any human involvement.

And it has helped my business operations a lot. It's helping us detect all the performance issues and data threats. UiPath Insights helps us to prevent these issues from happening again. It's powering up our operation. We can analyze all our departments in one place and get the best usage from them using Insights.

We fully depend on UiPath for the three departments: sales, marketing, and service. Many of our sales operations are done by UiPath, such as generating invoices, research, and engaging with clients through the help tickets they submit, as well as through the email communication we do. 

And one of the most important benefits is the ability to identify new opportunities in my employees' workflows. It is able to record and discover what my employees do and we are able to create automations as a result. 

Digital transformation is another main focus. Through the UiPath Marketplace, I can get expert virtual employees who do very expert jobs and tasks without having to hire somebody or bring them into the office as an employee. It's all automated by the software. I can discover, build, manage, and engage with the robots. My employees can easily manage all the robots and the processes, increasing the collaboration among us.

All of this makes it easier to store and move data from Google Sheets to my own sheets or my CMS on WordPress.

It saves a lot of time. It has really transformed my operation from a situation where we were always pressed for time and had slow response times to customers. With UiPath, we have increased our customer satisfaction scores and get tasks done faster than ever. My employees are now using the time they used to spend on certain tasks for things that require more thought. It has transformed business operations 180 degrees, making everything easier, helping the business to grow faster, and improving performance. We have control of the front-end work as well as the back-end processes.

For me, the most valuable feature is the solution's ability to discover automation opportunities.

The Document Understanding feature for extracting information from documents or images helps reduce manual work, saving people from having to scrub data from PDF files or images. UiPath extracts all the information and stores it.

In addition, its AI and machine learning make everything easy, as do the Data Service tools, because they don't require coding to create automations. I can do everything without coding knowledge.

And the UiPath user community is the best. The people there are very friendly and helpful, and engage with each other. UiPath has done a good job building a good forum and a good blog, and making the community members interact with each other. The community is one of the reasons UiPath is my choice. It is a strong community.

I like most of the UiPath tools, but the UiPath Academy, in particular, wasn't my favorite part. It didn't have enough onboarding guidance when I started. The learning curve for the courses in the Academy was very difficult in the beginning. I had to turn to Google and YouTube to learn from other people, experts, and the community. The community was friendly, but the academy wasn't that helpful for me. I think it needs to improve on the information it provides to make it easier for beginners to learn, to help decrease the learning curve.

Also, the user interface needs to be more customizable, and the debugging tool doesn't work well enough. It needs some improvements.

I have been using UiPath for one year and eight months. I have several websites and three startups, and I also implement UiPath and automations for other companies.

It's stable. It has 99 percent uptime. 

Sometimes, when we are dealing with a large set of data, it becomes slower. I don't know if it is something to do with UiPath or something else, like the operating system or the connections. It is almost always stable, but when dealing with large data, it becomes a little buggy and slower. Sometimes it freezes and I have to turn everything off and restart it.

Their support staff has good knowledge about whatever I raise, but they are late in responding, at times. I have had to turn to the community more. When I can't find an answer, I turn to them and only after them to support. It should be the other way around. I should be turning to the support group and then, if needed, to the community. 

One good thing that I have found is that UiPath responds to the community and the recommendations of users. When we recommend something, they put it on their roadmap and they make plans for it in their app. They are engaging and friendly with users and the community, but they are late in responding.

Positive

I started by using Blue Prism but only for three or four months and then I left it and turned to UiPath. I couldn't find answers to my questions when I was using Blue Prism. I couldn't find a professional community to engage with or to get help from. This was the reason I started turning to UiPath, after reading a few reviews from several websites and some of the community posts. The UiPath community was providing good information about every capability of the solution. In my experience with Blue Prism, I couldn't find any valuable communities out there. With UiPath I found the opposite. 

Even now, I find it good to engage with the UiPath community. Whenever I need an answer to something or an explanation about a use case, I always turn to them.

They have to reduce the price a little bit for basic users, startups, and small companies.

One of the projects we have been working on is for a medical company. It includes fetching medical records from the company's web-based portal. These records have to be pasted into Excel and consolidated. We then send them back to the client via email. We use Orchestrator to schedule the process to run every day at three intervals. It is running as an unattended bot.

We have also used it for another company to help with their employee onboarding process.

If we had to build code from scratch in UiPath, we would have to configure proper exception handling and log creation. We would also have to connect it to Orchestrator queues. But with the predefined REFramework (Enhanced Robotic Enterprise Framework) template, those requirements have been built already. All we have to do is invoke our code in one of the four states: Init, Get Transaction, Process Transaction, and End Process. Because it is connected to Orchestrator's queues, we can then run the process.

We have also been able to develop our code based on UiPath's security and compliance credentials. UiPath supports confidentiality. Until now, we have never faced a security problem. It is the most secure RPA tool.

Another benefit is that UiPath automation saves our clients time. During our requirements gathering, one client told us that the process they wanted to be automated takes around 15 to 30 minutes to complete when done manually. As a result of the solution we implemented using UiPath, it is now completed within two minutes.

There are two features that I find to be the most valuable in UiPath. 

One is Orchestrator because it allows us to manage the bots and processes. For example, we can monitor unattended bots' run history and their logs. We can also modify our code based on screenshots by logging the screenshots and then viewing the logs in an Orchestrator job. That helps us trace errors and rectify them.

The second valuable feature is REFramework which is a pre-defined template built with proper exception handling and logging activities. Those aspects help developers to develop code properly.

In addition, I have implemented UiPath with ABBYY FlexiCapture for some projects, and that has been very helpful for successfully completing those projects and providing a positive impact for our customers. It makes it very easy to extract data from a PDF and then build code to process it in UiPath. The integration of ABBYY FlexiCapture with UiPath is a very good feature.

When it comes to REFramework, we need more training videos and tutorial documents for beginners. 

And while there are a lot of videos to learn about basic activities in UiPath, we need more documents and key points on how to connect third-party connectors. That would be very helpful for beginners and for quick implementation.

I've been working in UiPath for almost two years. I use it daily.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

The scalability is also excellent.

Sometimes technical support will get stuck on how to execute further, but we raise our queries in the UiPath Community Forum. There are so many RPA developers there and we get quick replies from them. We're able to build solutions based on their information. The forums are very useful for us.

Positive

I used to use Blue Prism.

I have seen a lot of return on investment with UiPath because it enables quicker implementation of automations.

When I compared the basics between Blue Prism and UiPath, I felt UiPath was much better.

With Blue Prism it takes a lot of time to build code and workflows. For example, to fetch data from Excel within UiPath only one activity is needed, called Read Range. But Blue Prism requires use of three activities to do the same thing. First, I have to open the Excel instance, then open the worksheet, and then fetch the data from the worksheet. Using UiPath means quicker implementations. 

And there are a lot more features in UiPath when compared to Blue Prism, and I haven't seen any disadvantages of UiPath. Using it, there is a solution for every process. There is no such thing as a process that cannot be done in UiPath. UiPath is the best solution for RPA and for our customers.

UiPath doesn't require any maintenance.

We are able to build workflows very quickly and it doesn't take that much coding knowledge to learn and understand UiPath. Beginners are able to learn it quickly and get into the businesses.

Choose UiPath. It is more helpful than any other tool for implementing solutions quickly and creating customer satisfaction. Based on my experience, UiPath is the best tool for automating RPA projects and repetitive processes.

I'm not currently using UiPath, but in my previous organization, which I left seven months ago, we had a complex trading application that included a web form and a Windows form. And on the Windows form was an Electron framework. If you want to run a web application inside a Windows application, Electron is a bridge between the web application and the actual Windows app. Because it was a complex application, it was not very easy to automate. That's where UiPath came in. It perfectly fit our automation testing scenario.

Before UiPath came into the picture, we were planning on doing automation testing with Selenium. The test plan with Selenium was going to take about three months. When UiPath was introduced and we started working on it, we completed the whole automation, end-to-end, in about one and a half months. It saved us that much time. And we made sure that our product was delivered with the required quality and that we did not compromise on that.

Because UiPath is SaaS, we were able to automate everything in a very productive manner. We were able to cross-verify all the flows and all the functionalities. And UiPath didn't require a huge amount of setup. It runs on minimal requirements.

In terms of human error, we saw a reduction, of course. It's not possible for a human to catch every error when new functionality is built. With UiPath automation, we were able to analyze errors right away and resolve them.

Another benefit was that it freed up employee time. It did a lot of the work by itself. The user only had to make sure that the correct workflow was involved and he could just sit back and check that everything was going correctly. It probably saved us 45 minutes daily.

UiPath makes you more productive because it comes with a lot of drag-and-drop features. You don't need to know the APIs to access particular elements on the screen. You can just drag and drop and define your actions and go ahead with the workflow. You can focus on the workflow rather than learning about the APIs, which is what happens with Selenium and other automation tools. That is one of the most beneficial features of UiPath.

I don't know if I was doing something wrong, and I did get assistance from the UiPath guys on this, but sometimes UiPath wasn't able to find an element on the screen. But that's what UiPath is for, and we wanted to make sure that our workflows were working correctly. Sometimes it was able to find an element and sometimes it was not. UiPath support did give us a solution, but it was not helpful enough.

The issue that I mentioned earlier, that sometimes it wasn't able to find the elements, was the only issue I saw with respect to UiPath. Otherwise, nothing was breaking and nothing was problematic on the UiPath side.

They were very friendly and they tried to be very helpful, but they weren't able to solve the issue I raised.

Positive

The version of UiPath that we used involved a direct installation. We asked our in-house team to get it installed because we didn't have the permissions to install software. They installed it in our system and we started using it right away. It was very straightforward.

I have worked with Selenium, which is an automation tool. That has quite a learning curve, but with UiPath it only takes you one or two weeks to get started. Once you're familiar with the basic tools, you can start writing a workflow. It is straightforward; nothing complex.

I never did the UiPath Academy courses because we had senior team members to help us and, in that company, we had a "learning playground" where we could go through the slides directly, without going through a whole learning process. We were then able to start our work right away.

UiPath did a good job. Before going into production, we needed to make sure that every test scenario and every case was handled. That's where we took advantage of the UiPath. We would run UiPath again and again and there were no breakages in our code and nothing was falling apart before going into production. I was working for an investment bank and every record was important.