UiPath Platform Reviews

One of the use cases that I have recently completed is related to SAP and the interaction with Excel and our internal application. We are going with the JD Edwards EnterpriseOne ERP application and we used UiPath to help in this area, and were able to do so within a few days.

Some of our people are going for process automation and some are doing desktop automation.

It helps our developers learn and implement things faster.

Also, the UI Targets feature has helped us with some difficult situations. We were using other solutions for these situations but our company has moved away from them to using UiPath, and it's working very well. 

UiPath provides lots of integration to our ERP application and lots of new updates are coming out day by day. It helps us to automate our tasks.

We are using the solution's selector technology for UI automation. That is the most important feature for us. For example, one of the applications in our company is being updated day by day, by the development team. We use selector to make it dynamic.

We also use the latest version of the desktop Assistant tool for some queueing activity in UiPath Orchestrator. The tasks in the queue are continually updated and then they are run by robots. Using Assistant, we get a lot of information about our queues, like if something fails, for example. Also if a robot fails we get robot status-type information from the Assistant. The Assistant plays a good role because, if a process is going wrong, we have control. Using the Assistant we can stop that process. It is a most important feature from UiPath.

An area which the UiPath team is rapidly working on is machine learning and artificial intelligence. At the moment, it is a little difficult to understand. If they could add some more training on it in their Academy, it would help customers to learn about these features.

I have been using UiPath for the last eight months.

We only use the stable versions, regardless of whatever they are releasing, to avoid bugs and errors. In the stable versions, we have never found any issues or any bugs. If there is any issue, we have a team that will contact the UiPath team and we will get quick solutions. But so far, we have never had any problem or issues with a stable version of UiPath.

We use the Assistant to handle all the robots' actions. We are scaling and tracking it. That is very important for us. The scalability features of UiPath are awesome.

In the eight months I have been working with UiPath I have implemented seven or eight projects. Day by day we are increasing our usage of it, and UiPath is also increasing the product's features and adding technologies. That enables us to work on more projects, as it is easy to integrate.

We have been able to implement a lot of little projects. That is one of the reasons that it is cost-effective. In addition to the affordable price, it just takes a few days to develop solutions for these projects.

In India, a developer costs about 16,000 rupees per day. Using UiPath, all our projects have been done in 30 days. If we tried to do these little projects in another technology, they would be more costly because they would be more time-consuming.

Our company is based on automation. UiPath is the correct solution for this. It is cost-effective and has an affordable price.

UiPath is not the only technology we are using, but we are migrating to UiPath because it is cost-effective. The previous solution was Blue Prism, but for the little projects, it was not the right solution.

In addition, the Control Room is really required for other technologies, like Blue Prism, but there is no need for it with UiPath, because we manage and deploy it with our team only. We don't need to worry about the Control Room.

For the beginner the UiPath Academy has a lot of training available. It's important to go through the training. After the training you can easily work on any project in UiPath. So first of all, follow the training. For intermediate-level users, UiPath is the correct solution. These users just need to keep up to date, day by day, because the UiPath team is rapidly updating the features.

The Picture in Picture functionality for attended automations is a new feature. Up until now we have not used PiP, but we have some use cases for an internal project we are doing and are looking into it for the future.

We are using UiPath Automation Cloud, but we have not yet migrated our on-premises UiPath instance to it. We are thinking about the on-premise because it fully depends on our own enterprise. If we go to the cloud, we will be able to collaborate better with our team and what others, because it is "public."

We are using attended automation. I help drive a lot of products in UiPath. Now, we are using their data process mining and document understanding features. We are creating forms, then putting data on the forms, so our attended bots will work.

We use UiPath to resolve customer complaints by creating buttons that link to back-end integrations.

Employees can see information very quickly, reducing a lot of complications.

Uipth gives us as good speed and accuracy to improve all the bot la performance.

I like the document understanding feature. It gives us more accuracy. 

The AI and machine learning features are very useful for us.

UI Targets enabled us to quickly build automations within multiple applications, even without the right connectors. For example, we can drag and drop Outlook activities.

We use UiPath selector technology is a wonderful feature, especially compared to other RPA tools.

From mobile applications, we use Orchestrator where we can monitor processes and share them. 

Need more AI and Machine learning build technology and integration of 3rd party applications. Need some improvements in orchestrator

We have been using it for around two years.

5,000 people are using UiPath.

Any queries that we have, we can go onto their forums. If there are issues, we can contact their support and they will resolve them.

We have used Automation Anywhere, which is complex to understand. 

The initial deployment was not complex.

I will rate the level of expertise is 9(out of ten)

The attended automation has saved us time.

The pricing is average; it is not too high nor too low.

Its speed is better than other RPA solutions. They release more updates, details, and features compared to their competitors. 

We can learn from UiPath Academy.

I would rate the solution as a nine (out of 10).

We're mainly focused on finance for the time being so we've used UiPath for invoice processing and e-billing reconciliation. It makes sure that all of our converting information matches within our client databases. We've done a couple of solutions that track budget spend for certain clients, making sure that if the budget overruns or comes close to overrunning, then someone gets notified. If we get a new client or if a new legal case is opened, automation can make sure that all that information is then uploaded into our database. 

We've done a couple of smaller automations for the legal teams. These have been fairly basic ones though. There were a couple that download files from an email for them, and then rename them with the correct naming conventions, and saves them into correct drives. 

Another use case is to remove outdated users or information from our databases in line with the GDPR system.

In a general sense, UiPath has helped with data lineage, understanding where a process starts, who it rests with, and where it ends. It has made the process that we have automated a little bit more clear of which parts of the process are necessary, which are the parts that hold up the whole process, and which are the ones that are needlessly complicated.

For starters, it just helps give a bit more of an understanding of our processes once they're automated. Secondly, it's changed the way that we approach problems. We're tied into contracts that we might necessarily not want to be, but because we rely on the solution, we don't have a choice. Whereas, because UiPath is so versatile, we can use that to fill in gaps to take over processes, which otherwise in the past, we thought that only one specific tool could do for us. Now, we feel like we'd be less reliant on these specific tools to do a specific job. 

Third, a lot of teams are starting to understand that things can be automated. Whether it's in finance, HR, or even the legal teams, we started speaking to all the different teams and now they're bringing work to us and they're getting an understanding of things that do need to be done by a person and which don't. People aren't just doing work for the sake of it now. If they think there isn't a point to something and it can be automated, they bring it to us and we automate it. So, it's changed the way that we look at processes and don't just hardheadedly get someone to do it for no reason.

It checks our invoice stage for one of the processes that we do for e-billing. Previously, there wasn't anyone to check the financial data that we have in our systems against our clients and our recipients, and making sure that it all matches up. That process wasn't done at all so a month or two months later, a client would come back to us and say, "Hang on, you billed a strong amount or you've put our billing address wrong" which is obviously a little embarrassing. These things went completely unobserved for months. The client had to chase us, complain, and tell us we needed to fix it. Whereas now, it's more of a proactive approach rather than waiting for clients to come to us and tell us that we've done something wrong. We actually have the automation that can check and then validate those mistakes before they're even a problem and before they're spotted by anyone.

We're still in the early stages but we are starting to reach the point where UiPath is speeding up the cost of our digital transformation.

The digital transformation has made a couple of the lawyers' jobs easier by getting rid of the admin staff. It's freed up time and it makes things easier for everyone.

UiPath has definitely reduced our processing times as well. It really depends on the process but it has sped up. 

It has also decreased our error rates. At the moment we're looking to purchase an orchestration platform. At that point, we'll be able to collect more information about exact numbers and we'll actually have the analytics. 

The ability to use APIs within UiPath is really helpful. The web scraping is really great. It's so easy to use, it's very intuitive, and it's usually pretty consistent. When web pages change you need to update it, but it makes it quick. If you need to do another quick process, it's really easy to get it quickly and set something up. I can just scrape data from a website and save it somewhere.

The ease of building automation depends. UiPath makes things that are fairly simple but looks a little bit tricky in another language really easy. But if you're trying to do something really complicated, then sometimes it can be a little bit more tricky. It depends, sometimes it's really simple for fairly basic automations, I think it's fantastic. But when you want to try and get into the nitty-gritty and try and write your own code and then stick in there, it can sometimes be a bit difficult to use.

The documentation can be a little bit lacking. I think they improved it a little bit last month. Last time I checked, it seemed like they spent a bit of time trying to improve it. Sometimes some of the processes are nicely documented. UiPath offers training, which they provide on their website. They teach you how to use it, but for some processes, it just seems like the documentation isn't really there. It makes it a little bit difficult when you're using a specific process from the first time. 

If you're trying to invoke a method in UiPath, if you're trying to write a C# in there directly,  or if you need to do something which can't really be done in UiPath, but it can be done in C# or Python or something else, sometimes it's not that intuitive. It can be a little bit more complicated than it needs to be. I think that integration with other languages could be a little bit better.

We have been using UiPath permanently for around eight months, but we've been using it in-house for about a year before that.

UiPath itself is very stable because it interacts with so many different applications. I noticed in the past, at times, when using it with browsers, for example, using it with Google Chrome or Firefox, occasionally Chrome or Firefox will update and UiPath can take sometimes a week or two to update with it. For that week, you're able to use any solution that involves Google Chrome or Firefox, because it's waiting for that update. I've seen that happen with a couple of different applications, not as much recently. UiPath itself is very stable because it can interact with anything. If anything is updated and UiPath doesn't have time to update drivers to match that, sometimes you can get left a little bit stuck.

It's not really easy when you're using orchestrator to scale up and create a server, add a new bot, get a new license, and get it running. 

At the moment, it's just me using UiPath. I'm a developer and the architect for the solution as well. But we're planning to expand the team next year. 

We have a couple of processes that are running constantly, so I think we're using it as much as we can, and as much as our licenses allow. We're at a point now where we need an orchestrator to keep track and run everything at the same time. We're in the process now of purchasing that. I'll see where we're moving to, to expand quite far beyond that after we've got it. We're just at the point of ramping up.

I've sent a couple of requests to support when we needed licenses and when we changed to a different computer or a different user, and they got back to us really quickly and solved it within a day or so. I've been pretty happy with UiPath so far. I think every time I've sent a request to them, it's been resolved pretty quickly, and even if they couldn't resolve it super quick, the response times are usually within 24 hours or so, which is really good. I can't remember a time where we've been stuck in the dark with them.

I've used Automation Anywhere, but I haven't really used it within my work.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. I implemented UiPath for a couple of years before I came to my current company. It was quite easy, but even the first time it's always been quite easy and quite simple to implement.

The initial setup only took a couple of days to get it all installed properly and cleared with IT. In terms of getting the first process up and running, it took about a week or two because we already had a couple of processes that were available. That's just a case of tweaking them, making sure they're all okay, and then just getting them set up and getting more packaged up.

Our initial strategy was mainly to focus on finance and to try and reduce the outsourced headcount with a couple of the finance teams. We outsource a lot of our work to a couple of other companies and we want to reduce the cost of that, so I automate it in-house. Our other strategy was to try and free up as much time for our lawyers as possible to make sure they weren't bogged down with work. It gives them more time to focus on the clients and work up better relationships with them.

We're still looking at the process that we've automated and seeing how much time and money we're saving with this crisis, but we don't have that information at the moment.

The pricing is pretty fair. Sometimes the pricing can be a little bit strange. There are different prices if it's for a specific user, a specific PC or if it's an attended bot or unattended bot. The price can be quite different, but I think when you talk to UiPath or when you look at the pricing sheets, there's not always a justification of why a certain license is more expensive than another. 

Licenses are more expensive than another but I wonder why there's such a big difference, why attended is four times more expensive, and that sort of thing. In terms of the orchestrator, I think it was a bit too much. It used to cost about 20,000 pounds a year. Now, they are ramping up costs. If you get an orchestrator but with just a few blocks, it's cheaper and then you can add up more parts to the orchestrator. So the cost goes up, which I think is better.

Definitely to try and get as many teams involved as possible to open up the conversation about RPA within the business. It works best when you've got lots of teams who have an understanding of RPA and how it works. They can come to you with their potential projects and you can filter through them and see which ones are going to be the most helpful.

It's hard if no one else in the business really knows RPA or how it works, or if there's a bit of a wall there. It's important to introduce RPA to as many different teams as possible and to encourage people to get involved, think about the processes that they do in it, and try to identify what can be helpful.

It's important to keep RPA close to the applications and the IT teams because if you're using RPA or UiPath you're going to need to be able to be speaking to your team who need permissions or admin privileges, or you need apps to be updated. It's important if you're going to put it in, have it as close to apps and development as possible.

It's a case of understanding that it's not a case of trying to get everything automated that you possibly can. The goal shouldn't just be to automate everything. If you've got a process and you can do 99% of it automated but you can't automate the last 1%, you can but it's going to be really fairly inefficient. Understand that it's fine for a process to have some bits that are automated, some of which are done by a person. The hybrid workforce, rather than going into the strategy of just automating everything is ideal. I've learned that trying to find that balance and getting that communication between the two is good.

I would rate UiPath a nine out of ten. 

We are a UiPath customer, working with them to develop some products. It is a bit of a mixed thing where we are developing some products with them from scratch, but they are acting as the provider. We develop things, and if they're useful for others, then others can use them.

We are doing some pretty bespoke things to help us develop some solutions, but also help them develop their UI solutions in the legal area. We are working on a few things with UiPath to develop some search robots, some solutions to automatize subcontracts, and some timekeeping entries. These are several things that we are doing right now.

We are doing three things with them:

1. A robot to help us with software for time management, automating time entries. 
2. A robot to help us with filling in our engagement letters (contracts). 
3. A robot to help us with various public searches, i.e., the automation of searches of the public record.

We are adjusting robots from similar things that they do. The robots are not yet in production. 

The most valuable feature is its ability to save time with a task. In general, it improves accuracy as well.

UiPath's ease of use for automating our company's processes is a five out of five. We have found it very easy to talk to them, identifying what can be done along with the potential use cases. They have been very good at guiding us through what is realistic at this point, how their robots could help us save time and improve accuracy, and how our users can engage with their robots, e.g., ensuring that users engage with the robots and use their product. 

When we started to talk about practical implementation, their team was extremely switched onto identifying and fitting their product to our needs. They explained to us how we can use their products, what can be done to adapt their product, and what may happen sometime in the future, not necessarily now. I found this very helpful and straightforward.

What we have in mind in terms of what the robots could do for us is significantly more than what UiPath does now, but it takes more work. From my perspective, there is just a wide scope of implementation that goes beyond what we're starting right now. That is essentially the improvement. While I have nothing negative to say about our experience with them so far, I think we can work to develop more complex products with them. They are already working to develop something for our use cases, but what I would like is if we could develop more things for more complex needs, e.g., where we start with simpler stuff, then we can add things to what we're doing now.

We are in the development phase.

It is too early. We are still in development.

During the development phase, there are five people involved in the development phase. The users will be about 100.

We have not used their support.

We were not previously using something in this area. 

We have been thinking about ways to streamline our activities using technology. It happens that we knew UiPath, so we started to engage with them about what they could do for us. We had something like 20 ideas that we could implement, then we just started the easier ones which were closer to the products that they have. As things go, we will see whether we expand to other things.

We have known UiPath quite well and for a long time. They are also the leaders in the field, so it was a very easy choice.

The initial setup was quite straightforward. We started to discuss potential solutions, then we met with parts of their team, developing that business area. After that, we met with the technical people designing the product. We had a couple of initial conversations and did some testing. It has been extremely simple and straightforward.

We are supposed to review some of their proposals and provide feedback. We are probably a week or two away from production.

UiPath could have probably implemented the solution in a couple of weeks. We had some delays on our side.

We did the initial setup ourselves.

It is important for whatever we implement that it's cost effective in a sense that the robots will replace some human time. If human time costs less than the robot, then that's not a good deal. Normally, human time will cost more than a robot, and that's what we're trying to displace: the human time. We want to replace it with a cheaper robot. 

We only looked at UiPath, because we know them quite well.

So far, the experience has been excellent. I would rate the solution 10 out of 10, but we haven't finished the implementation.

Look internally what your needs are. Try to identify what you could improve with software robots, ensuring these needs are clearly identified and the product is fit for purpose. Also, you should make sure there will be buy-in in the organization, so people will actually use the product.

We have developed a product for a court of arbitration. UiPath provides the automation engine behind it. Our product is a platform that is live online. It allows a party to provide some contract information, and the robot assembles a document and communicates with DocuSign, our signature provider. It then sends out a correspondence to the other party and manages the signature process for a bespoke contract for an arbitration agreement.

This is a service that we provide to the world, pro bono, as it were, to promote arbitration and the adoption of a particular arbitration clause. It's accessible to all. Parties can log in and it helps them to negotiate and conclude an arbitration agreement in a mediated fashion. The robot sends out email on behalf of a third-party, a court of arbitration, and it helps the parties get that agreement done.

It's about concluding an arbitration agreement before the dispute goes any further.

It helps us in providing added value to the clients and to the community at large. It's a marketing thing for us, in the widest possible sense, rather than something that we use in our practice.

But in terms of reducing the cost of digital transformation, if a person had to do what the robot does, it would probably be impossible. It would be impossibly costly. If one person had to handle the communication, instead of the robot, and try to negotiate each addendum, nobody would do it because it would take days or weeks for a lawyer to manage, and it would be prohibitive. Yet, all of a sudden, we have this service that is so cheap in many ways that it can even be provided for nominal user fees. It's quite dramatic.

I would also imagine that processing time is reduced by many orders of magnitude. As a professional, if I had to manage an addendum like that, it would take me weeks. And it takes about seven minutes or so, if all goes well.

What I have found interesting is that our product acts as a human would but it's not intrusive. It doesn't require any real integration or interface with one's own systems, in any meaningful way. Obviously, you need access, an account to log in, but it otherwise acts as a human, and that makes deployment quite smooth. It doesn't require you to change anything in your system. I found that very useful.

Regarding the ease of building automations, I'm not sure how it's done because I'm not a programmer myself, but it's great. Just looking at how fast they moved once we had the program settled in — it was quite fast. For this particular process, which is assembling a document, talking to DocuSign, sending out emails, and so on, the deployment of production was like "today." It was quite quick.

In terms of the ease of management of automations using UiPath, I don't dare poke into it, as a non-technical person, but it looks manageable. I have someone who does not do RPA normally, who doesn't do this type of programming at all, but that person knows where to look for errors and doesn't get lost. It's reasonably accessible.

I could use more standardized features, retail-style, things that I could use off-the-shelf. Right now, all this requires quite a bit of adaptation in bespoke work with UiPath, which they've done very well. But looking at it after having used it, I would get stuff that is prepackaged from them, if they were any.

We launched with UiPath in June.

The stability of the solution is okay. 

The downside of the upside, when I said that it works like a human, is that in some cases, if it interacts with a website that is changing, then it's like a human. You need to adapt it to the changing environment in which it works. That's an inevitable fact of life, that it interacts with other apps. It can also interact through APIs, but you want it to be very flexible, you want it to be an agent, like a human. The downside of that is that if something changes with a website, then of course, you have to change the robot and tweak it a little bit. But that's the only issue that has required our attention so far.

Our product is a public-facing instrument and we have had no problem with the number of users, so we have not seen any issues with scalability.

In terms of potentially increasing our use of UiPath, we're exploring a number of solutions actually, for practice management and actual lawyer work. These would be in-house solutions, rather than public-facing. We have a few ideas that we have run by them and we are waiting for feedback.

We've had no problem with the customer support. We were in direct contact with the whole team. They have always been quick to respond. I would rate them a 10 out of 10.

We would use regular Microsoft automation features. I would have a flag on a particular correspondence, or a particular rule for attachments. We would use little bits and bobs of automation that are available, but we did not have any bespoke solution.

We went with UiPath because they made themselves known in the sector and it was a question of the vision that they communicated. There was a modest vision of providing solutions to very discrete problems, not revolutionary solutions to everything. Rather, they focused on whatever helps in a particular organization. We liked that. It matched our understanding of legal tech as well. It needs to be supportive of whatever little bit of help you need, rather than providing you with an environment that engulfs you with everything. We liked that approach, and when we approached them they were very receptive.

The initial setup process was okay. I'm a non-technical person, but I was able to manage it. 

It took quite a bit to figure out what we wanted from it, the flow and the logic of it. After we agreed on that, on the concept, actual production took two or three days. Of course, somebody had already done a proof of concept, although that was not based on a final brief. We danced around and changed it a bit.

For maintenance, we have somebody in tech that we pop questions to, and our maintenance of the server is done in-house as well.

We have realized return on our investment. It was a joint project with UiPath so we had special arrangements in terms of licensing, but it was very well received in the market. It was very beneficial for us.

Our product is something that we launched in June, and the robot has been featured in general business publications, in the Kluwer Arbitration Blog, and the Resolver, which is the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators magazine, as well as the Romanian Arbitration Journal. Essentially, everybody knows about it. It is one of the most popular UiPath robots out there; the most featured and interviewed robot in the wild. We were quite pleased with the publicity.

My advice is to think about it very carefully and know exactly what everybody is doing every day in the office, the little bits and pieces. Really look at that seriously, because there are so many things that we do in a software environment that are very amenable to automation, and it saves a lot of time. Think very carefully about the particular needs of your office and look into it, because it can save you a lot of money.

It's clear that this is the future.

We use it to automate searches in public databases. We have lawyers who need to search for various companies. For example, we are searching insolvency files for a list of business partners, so we use the robot to perform the search and notify clients about its results. Thus, it helps us with our work in searching public registries.

We have the Studio license and attended robots.

It enables us to provide new services, e.g., our use case is something that we could not have delivered manually. Now that we use the robot, it is something that we can offer to clients. Therefore, it has helped us expand our scope of services and offer to clients more competitive fees. We are now trying to get more clients.

If we were to do this manually, it would take us one day for 200 companies. Now, it takes about half an hour. So, it has reduced our time to process information. Before, we didn't offer these services on a mass scale. We just often did it for a couple of companies. Now, we can offer it on a larger scale.

One of the departments in our organization does use UiPath for compliance purposes: To send reminders to our clients. We have to ensure that clients are compliant when they submit financial statements. We use the robot to send them reminders to update the steps of compliance, i.e., if it's done. This is not my team, but another team who uses it for compliance purposes. It has increased their level of compliance because it's timely and there are no errors in the reminders.

We mostly value the fact that it easily interacts with existing systems. We don't have to go to a complex interface to access public information to send the emails, etc. This is the good part.

Its ease of management is okay. Our attended robots have some Excel files that we use to manage and configure the robots. It is quite straightforward.

It has helped relieve the legal staff of the burdensome task of searching on the public registry. For them, this has been a big improvement. It saves time and also the risk of human error has been reduced, because now the robot does the work. So, you don't get bored when you check 2,000 companies on the portal. The staff is overall more satisfied because they can do more value-added tasks than performing this search.

The pricing for Orchestrator and unattended robots could use improvement. If we plan to roll out and implement more robots, then perhaps lower costs on Orchestrator and unattended robots would make adoption even easier. 

For roughly a year and a half.

So far, the stability has been good. We haven't had any issues.

If you have an attended robot, then it is scalable to a certain extent, but this is because of the price tag. If you think through your use cases, then you can use the same license for multiple purposes. If we think of scalability in the sense of changing the process, then this is something that can be done, but it requires extra development time. So, it's rather scalable.

We have two lawyers using this robot. Their role is to monitor the robot and make sure that the robot works fine. For example, if there are any complaints from the clients, then they can respond.

We, in legal, are among the first to use this robot to my knowledge. Other than a couple of robots that I've mentioned in this review, I'm not aware of other robots.

The technical support is very good. They were very responsive. We had a question about the license and they replied very quickly.

We did not previously use another solution. We decided to implement an RPA solution because we wanted to streamline our processes. We also wanted to be able to offer and develop new services for our clients. For these particular use cases, using other technology solutions would have been more expensive and complicated to set up.

The initial setup was a bit complex. We are a very big company with a lot of IT centers. I think the complexity was on our side. The initial part of setting up the virtual machine and installing the licenses took roughly two months. After that, the development time was very short: one week.

Our experience, as administrators of the platform, is quite good. Once the robot is set up, it is very easy to see the results, reports, and if there are any errors. It is quite easy to use.

The robot that searches for insolvency cases was built in one week. After that, we have been testing it and making adjustments, but the construction and development time were very short.

It speeds up digital transformation because it's easy to implement and have it live. Therefore, it is something that we can use very easily to streamline our operations. 

I handled the project and managed the discussion with our IT. We had several infrastructure teams who set up the virtual machines and helped us install the licensing. We had a third-party developer who developed the robot. We also had an internal team who tested the implementation. I oversaw everything.

We were happy with the third-party developer.

Now, there are several providers/developers who can build UiPath robots quite easily and at affordable prices. So, in our case, it was quite a straightforward process of building the robot.

Our processing time was reduced to half an hour. Something that would have taken up the whole day (eight hours) was reduced to half an hour. This has freed up our legal staff’s time to focus on more important and strategic tasks.

What we have managed to do is to offer a completely new service. It is something that we did not offer on a regular basis or big scale. Using RPA, we can offer it to a larger scale with the reduced costs.

The pricing is okay, but I recommend to build a business case before going live. Ensure that you really use the license and building the robot makes sense. Try to think of multiple use cases, because one license can be used for several robots.

There are additional costs for using third-parties. We also have internal costs with the infrastructure and for the virtual machines where the robot operates.

The costs are quite affordable. It is a solution that makes sense from a business perspective.

We didn't do a very formal business review process.

I think the platform is very good.

Have a good consultant advise you on the processes of automations: How to build the use case and business case. You will need a bit of knowledge around RPA and business processes to be able to have a successful implementation. 

Have a stronger technical partner tool to help with developing the robot, making adjustments, testing, etc. Testing is very important. It is important that you allocate resources for testing.

Robots can do things in a different manner than we can and more efficiently. We have to be creative and think of processes, even if only part of them are repetitive, that we can automate and a human can work with the robot. Then, the overall the process is improved and our experience as humans is a lot better.

I would this solution a 10 out of 10 because they are very good at what they do. It's very important that you understand what the solution can do and its limitations. However, for this type of product, I think they are the best.

One of my primary use cases is invoice processing.

In this process, there are two applications including one for data and the other for the main application. The main application needs to take invoice data from the data process and match it with invoice details that it has. After this, the status needs to be recorded in the data process.

UiPath is growing day by day. We began with one unattended bot and we now have approximately 20 bots in production.

We are using the RE framework and it's very helpful for delivering the product on time.

The image-based automation is working as expected, using different levels of accuracy.

OCR-based activities should be improved to handle larger amounts of text.

UiPath does not recognize Google and Microsoft OCRs.

Sometimes UiPath will not work properly, even though it worked the previous day. Also, it may suddenly not work when we switch environments from development to QA. This happens approximately one out of ten times.

I have been using UiPath for the past two years.

Technical support has been helpful for debugging and fixing issues that we have had in production.

I did not use another solution prior to this one.

I began looking at Automation Anywhere, but when I saw how user-friendly the interface in UiPath was, I started learning it instead. I find it very comfortable to work with and develop processes.

I am proud to have UiPath on my resume as it is valuable for career growth. I plan to continue as a UiPath developer.

We use this solution to automate business processes and save millions of dollars in operational efficiency. We are developing new automated solutions for our clients and partners, and also training new developers to use this tool to deliver great results by the end of the year.

The business has saved million worth of dollars in cost savings.

The user interface is intuitive and it is easy to develop workflows.

The community is what I like most in UiPath and I think that without it, the solution would be hard to learn like Blue Prism was in its earlier years.

There could be improvements made in in terms of debugging. Troubleshooting is hard.

I hope there can be more major improvements in Orchestrator, such as the ability to have session variables other than assets.

Being able to filter work queues, just like what Blue Prism has, would be a helpful addition.

There are some limitations like the UiPath Executor becoming stuck when running 10GB text files, which is something that really needs to be fixed.

The training is difficult and should be made better.

We have been using UiPath for almost two years.

UiPath is a very stable solution.

This solution is very scalable.  Our UiPath team has grown from 10 to more than 50 developers, including business analysts, process analysts, developers, senior developers, and solution architects. Hoping to grow our organization more as new clients are coming in.

Customer support is great but not that fast.

Prior to UiPath, I used Blue Prism. I switched because my company switched.

The initial setup is not straightforward but also not complex.

I set up UiPath on my own.

More than a million dollars.

UiPath is more cost-effective than any other tool.

I did not evaluate other options. Aside from Blue Prism, UiPath is the best.

Overall, UiPath is the best in providing a community for all developers.