What needs improvement with UiPath?

In terms of UiPath Platform itself, I think improvements could be made to the UI arrangement to make it more user-friendly and simpler. The operational support is generally good, but often starts from scratch when we reach out with problems, resulting in wasted time. Finally, the cost and complexity of licenses could be simplified as some similar vendors provide features at a lower cost.

One thing which I can suggest is to integrate the CI/CD pipeline within UiPath Platform Orchestration. That will be the next step to get into a full Agentic service within UiPath Platform. I am currently using some external CI/CD pipelines, like Azure or others, and integrating them inside UiPath Platform would be an easy-to-go solution for anyone. The sales approach is a bit slow. It almost took a month to complete the entire sales process and just get the final quote from UiPath Platform US sales team. There was also some discomfort in selecting the packages. The AI unit bundle flexibility in pricing is missing. I wanted to buy a smaller portion of AI units but needed to purchase a large bundle. Recently, I faced an outage issue with Cloudflare, resulting in being unable to connect UiPath Platform with UiPath Platform Orchestration, and some of the UiPath Platform Orchestration services were down. This was the first time I faced a stability issue. I expected faster support during a production deployment issue. I got email communication, but a call would have been faster, resolving the issue more quickly.

I think UiPath Academy is a little confusing. Back in 2019 or 2022, it was good. You could clearly understand which exact course you wanted to pick and what you wanted to go through. Currently, there are bundles of courses. When I recently referred UiPath Academy to my neighbor who was interested in learning automation, I was literally confused about which Academy course I needed to refer. Previously, there was the developer certification, the standard certification, and the REFramework certification, which is advanced. The foundation and standard certification have now been divided into six or seven parts. It is very difficult to go through all those six and seven modules and send them to someone. Previously, all of these modules, which were six, seven, or maybe eight modules, were in just one course called the foundation UiPath course. It was much better when you could directly refer this course to someone instead of sending all those links or URLs.The only other thing is the budget constraints they might be having, such as going with lesser-cost tools instead of higher-cost tools.

I think UiPath Platform could improve in the catalog regarding options and hyperautomation, as I think this is more evaluated, and operations too. I don't want to see additional features in future releases. I don't have current pain points that I would want them to fix.

As a business-based person who handles engineering and IT from the business side, I can say that improvements would be beneficial in the automation of the entire software development life cycle through more agents, similar to the testing automation currently being done. The activities we have implemented are pretty straightforward. The testing time and process were somewhat challenging. While deployment was straightforward and easy, the testing part, particularly testing the functional use case, was difficult. Writing test cases and dealing with failures was challenging. We had apprehensions about whether it would work well with the current setup, even with some latency.

I did not find support helpful.

UiPath Platform can be improved with better navigation and documentation. When I've introduced someone to the new Studio or Orchestrator, they definitely click different things that are named similarly or the same, and that is probably the most confusing part of the process.

I would love to see UiPath Platform improved by having a better mobile application. Currently, while the web portion is available, the mobile app needs significant improvement.

In my opinion, UiPath Platform could be improved by being more consistent in the presentation of what's coming down the pipeline and when it can be delivered, as well as not changing the names of the products so often. It's confusing when they say, 'Oh, that used to be called this, and now it's that since we've combined it with this.' Ideally, we get more clarity, so that when I talk to a business user, they know what I'm talking about.

In terms of improvement, UiPath Platform should be easier to license. I would like the next release of UiPath Platform to include a user interface or dashboard for our operations staff who would be using Maestro processes.

I see room for improvement with UiPath Platform mainly in the hybrid strategy we're employing, as issues arise from the on-premise and cloud processing switch, particularly with document understanding, which can cause bugs. I believe moving completely to the cloud would alleviate these challenges, along with creating a unified development environment that avoids context switching. To achieve a perfect score of ten out of ten for UiPath Platform, I would suggest simplifying the setup process for agentic AI; experiences with Microsoft's platform illustrate that user-friendly interfaces facilitate quick adoption without requiring extensive expertise. Intuitiveness is key, as Microsoft users find it easy to create agents without extensive training, a contrast to the more complex nature of UiPath Platform's current setup.

I just came out of the product meeting, and I can say they are doing a great job as it is. I hope we can leverage a lot of the agentic features. We are taking a more cautious approach on AI. Making things more user-friendly, particularly for end-users, allowing those people to get involved in the process, would be wonderful, as I saw with Maestro. I cannot think of any additional features off the top of my head.

UiPath Platform can be improved by including the ability to build human-in-the-loop interfaces with chat and with web apps in the next release.

UiPath Platform can be improved by working on specific use cases and partnering with us to help bring more belief in the system, and solving the pain points for the industry is critical. Do not lose focus on a specific industry. Additional features that should be included in the next release are probably healthcare-specific connection and partnership with Epic. With the agentic part, we are facing some challenges in terms of governance, in terms of which agentic platform to use, whether we should use UiPath, whether we use our agentic platform that we have chosen. That's going to be the challenge. Governance and clinical use cases typically go through a lot of scrutiny from security and legal. So that's the challenge, however, that's nothing to do with UiPath.

Improving the forms on UiPath Platform so you can easily assess answers could be a big benefit. The different dashboards are not very convenient or handy; you have to do a lot of manipulation with them, and I'd rather have ease of use and them be more user-friendly. It would also be nice to have better insights into the processes, such as whether they are running smoothly and what the outcome is, because we have to leave a lot of breadcrumbs when we build something and would rather not have to do all that.

To improve UiPath Platform, I would really want to see improvements on Action Center in customization on how it's laid out. They have a layout that makes sense in some cases, but I would want to actually create a custom UI for Action Center because sometimes it does not make sense what they're trying to do, and you want to move things around. If we could edit the CSS, that would be great. On all of their tools, especially those meant for attended or human in the loop, any interface that we have that is business facing should be customizable. I would prefer to see UiPath hands off on that and just let the user figure out what is best for the end user instead of it being a prepackaged thing. Sometimes it works and makes total sense, but in other cases, it does not. Business users ask, 'Can we change this? Can we do this? Can we do that?' and the answer is often 'We can't because it's prepackaged.'

The next release of UiPath Platform should include a direct link to the documentation page from the Orchestrator, which would save us the trouble of searching it out. The negative aspect we considered was how quickly we can set things up on different platforms.

The biggest challenge for our company, which is a law firm, is that the data is very sensitive, and we do not want to expose our data on the cloud. Therefore, we have our system set up in an on-prem environment, and while we try to utilize new features, with on-prem, we cannot utilize all the new features such as AI Agent or many functions on the cloud. In an ideal world, instead of using the large language model, I would prefer the small language model so we can have our own model, maybe set up on-prem, which would be easier for us. The additional feature I would want to see included in the next release of UiPath Platform is the self-healing agent. We experience downtime, crashes, or performance issues sometimes. The situation with performance issues is usually caused by not upgrading the system in time, leading us to use an older version, which can result in certain packages not being supported and that affects functionality. The areas I see for improvement include the booming AI Agent capabilities and the need to fix maintenance issues that arise after a project is delivered, as addressing this can truly be a game-changer.

We haven't started using some of the newer, better features in UiPath Platform. A lot of the features I'd want to be able to use, they've already rolled out. We just haven't taken advantage of them yet. The only reason that it wouldn't be a ten out of ten right now is that they don't always identify my needs before I identify them to get their help.

That's a tough question about how UiPath Platform can improve. For me, starting out, it was very helpful that I utilized different other AI platforms to teach me the best way to go about creating a process in the tool, and perhaps it was a lack of my education, however, tools to leverage AI within the platform could continue to educate users as they're building out new processes. I would emphasize functionality to challenge one's thought process, asking whether one is going about it in the most efficient way, recognizing that there are a million different ways to do a process and questioning if I'm doing it the right way and needing tools to help with that. To be considered a ten out of ten, UiPath Platform needs to enhance its capabilities, and I would lean into the integration of AI to coach and mentor you through the process. While I have my connections throughout the company, often it's just myself. Having an AI friend who is a UiPath Platform professional that knows what's best would make it easier than having to gather information from various places.

To improve UiPath Platform, I definitely suggest including more integration services; the more customers they can connect with, the better, as there are a couple of major names missing, such as SAP connections and NetSuite.

To make it a ten out of ten, it would help if they understand that we don't work 24/7, so we're not going to respond immediately when they send an email asking for a response.

Personally, the only problem we have with it is some of the auditing ability and some of the user access and role building. If I had one thing that I would ask for more development in, it would be audit trail. We're a high-trust certified company, so we need to make sure that we have all that information. The ability to enforce and enroll people in different roles within the platform needs improvement.

UiPath Platform could be improved, especially in terms of documentation. For example, we were early adopters of IXP, and the initial documentation lacked enough information for us to understand the whole product and best practices. Although UiPath Platform started releasing new versions of documentation and courses, there remains a need for better engineering basics and courses on LLMs since they are crucial for understanding the product behind the scenes. The final products for both documentation and the Academy are good, but the release timing can be challenging for early adopters who struggle to understand the products at the beginning. UiPath Platform scales really from a technical standpoint, however, from a licensing and pricing perspective, scaling becomes challenging. In our case, we have an ELA, which sets restrictions on how many robots we can scale and how many AI units we can consume, making it a less-than-ideal experience regarding pricing when trying to scale.

It's really hard to answer what areas UiPath Platform could be better as they are so far ahead of the curve. We work with another partner who's more of a think tank that talks to us about our agentic journey, which is a necessity for everyone moving forward. When they learned that we were using UiPath Platform, they commented that we had it right. We're looking forward to using the platform as the basis and possibly integrating third-party applications that have agentic capabilities while using UiPath Platform as the backbone.

UiPath Platform can be improved, as there are many capabilities we can utilize. The upcoming Agentic AI is going to expose many opportunities for us. There are features such as UiPath Apps, which we have not been successful at implementing in our company due to limitations, as we want to give control to the user community to run their own bots, however, at this point we haven't been able to fully implement that. Additional features I would want to see included in the next release of UiPath Platform are the UiPath Apps and, along with Agentic AI, there are many use cases for the attended bots. If improvements can be made to attended bots, that would be beneficial asthere are many use cases in our company that we haven't explored yet.

UiPath Platform can be improved by providing more direct connectivity into source systems. Additional features that should be included in the next release include better or more connectivity. What would make it a full ten out of ten for me is that there is always going to be some room for improvement.

Sometimes, regarding the limitations, heavy-level architectures and structures are needed, such as architectural setup required to boost IT support for long-scale automation. The learning curve, while low-code advanced automation is related to AI and ML, requires substantial technical knowledge. There could be some performance issues, such as automation breaking when UI elements change frequently, so these are limitations which I face, and these are the areas where UiPath Platform can improve. The license pricing is very high, so compared to other competitors such as Automation Anywhere or Power Automate, it could be more competitive if these things were matched with the competitors.

There needs to be more user use cases in their demo, as the current use cases are very basic. They should include moderate use cases with varying difficulty because implementing a project using only simple use cases is insufficient. They have numerous features that cannot be covered completely in their tutorial, so adding instructions and small videos about particular features or assets would enable users to understand how to use these features without requiring additional training from the academy or other portals.

UiPath Platform is one of the top leaders. When developers are asked which tool is convenient for RPA development, they choose UiPath Platform. It provides extensive development options and is very convenient from a developer perspective. In terms of low-code, no-code capabilities, it competes with Power Platform and Automation Anywhere. The main area for improvement is pricing, as people are moving towards Power Platform due to license pricing considerations. Regarding technical support, I would rate it 6 or 6.5. Previously, they provided excellent support, but now the support quality varies based on the client's license tier. Clients with fewer licenses receive support only through email. For critical errors, we may receive an initial email response within two to three hours requesting basic information, but resolution can take one to two days. This is a significant change from their earlier approach.

There are areas within UiPath Platform that could improve. While the interface is user-friendly and features are advanced, further simplification could enhance usability. One improvement could be addressing compatibility issues. Sometimes, when upgrading, users need to downgrade due to version compatibility problems. I believe they should reduce the certification costs or offer better deals, especially around December or January when people may be interested in discounts.

The main area where UiPath Platform can be improved is the cost; everything else is good.

I don't find any features or aspects challenging or wish were different; the platform actually gives me all the support and I can use all features easily. At the moment, I don't wish for anything else regarding needed improvements from UiPath Platform.

There are a few areas in the UiPath Platform that could be improved. The OCR technology needs improvement, particularly for reading invoices, especially scanned invoices.

There is scope for improvement in the UiPath Platform, particularly with the Web Studio feature that has been launched recently. They could enhance the object repository feature, which allows maintaining selectors externally, as there are challenges associated with changes in selectors that require updating the library and the version in the code. The Web Studio works when there are APIs involved, but it could be made more user-friendly and developer-friendly. It currently works only in cases where it is not dependent on a machine.

We haven't worked much with AI features, but I am looking for some features there. Overall, it provides us with what we need the most. They can perhaps make the customizations and configurations for reuse easier for the developers, as it would help to expedite things.

UiPath Platform is doing a good job with enhancements; they are releasing new features almost every six months. However, I would recommend that they improve their ability to be a low-code, no-code platform, as this would be a great feature for their platform.

The areas where the UiPath Platform could be improved are in how most companies are adopting agent-tech AI. We will have to monitor how they are integrating it with agent-tech AI. Based on the literature, the UiPath Platform is taking concrete action, as they released their agent-tech framework last week. It is very difficult, so we will need to assess that and see how the product evolves into the agent-tech feature API integration.

There is one major feature I feel is missing from UiPath. When someone starts an automation, there should be some notification window on the screen to provide information about the flow's status and progress. Currently, users can see if the flow is running and some basic information, but there's no core notification window that fully informs users. Incorporating such a feature would greatly enhance user experience.

I do not like the Orchestrator setup and the licensing model. Its price is higher than others, and the licensing model is quite confusing. UiPath should develop models for situations when other applications disrupt automation and provide a mechanism to override that. Efficiency issues are present and should be addressed.

UiPath should be less sensitive to changes in the existing UI of the system we are trying to manipulate. If it was more intelligent in adapting to changes in the user interface and the tools we are trying to manipulate, it would be beneficial. If the UI changes or a label is changed, sometimes the whole flow breaks. Identifying where the flow breaks requires going into edit mode and making modifications. It might be quite extensive work with the new, updated UI.

We're looking to add AI, specifically generative AI, but it's a matter of our organization implementing it. With autopilot features like Microsoft's Copilot or ChatGPT, users can start chatting immediately. However, with UiPath, one needs the UiPath Assistant installed on every machine, which is unrealistic as many people use the same machine in the hospital.

There is a need for more videos and examples on upcoming enhancements and changes. If they can improve the OCR engine and provide more detailed documentation and multiple examples, it would be helpful for adapting to new updates.

UiPath should prioritize improving its updates and user-friendliness, particularly for new team members. Streamlining updates and simplifying the interface would enhance the onboarding experience and overall productivity.

UiPath's Unassisted Task Mining has room for improvement.

There are significant delays between the technical team and the actual team. We are also missing some integrations with Google.

I would like improvements in UiPath Studio speed. The development environment is sometimes slow, depending on the workflows, especially with legacy workflows.

UiPath needs work on the governance side. For example, they released Studio Web this year and have started work on its governance, but it initially lacked control from an administration standpoint. You could not lock down third-party libraries or other applications and integrations it had built in. For example, people could use a Google account, but we might have concerns about that from a security standpoint. Cybersecurity is taking a more significant place in IT, and we're mindful of that. Having explicit governance over what our users can do inside those technologies is essential. We hope to see that more over the next few years. We've given a lot of that feedback as customers to UiPath, and they've been working hard to get that into the pipeline and implement those changes.

The fast growth of UiPath can be difficult to keep up with, so more informative sessions or webinars showcasing potential returns on investment for specific industries would be beneficial.

The product documentation needs improvement as it tends to be self-contradictory and sometimes hard to access since we are on an older version. There is also a need for more consistency in product support and customer service.

There is a need for better autopilot features to enhance the functionality of UiPath.

Customer education is crucial. Currently, there's a time lag in training, which eventually impacts the customers. All stakeholders should receive updates simultaneously.

Scaling efficiently and supporting people with technical information has been challenging.

Since we are still in the early stages of using UiPath, identifying areas for improvement is challenging. We anticipate that some aspects may emerge as time progresses.

While UiPath is exceeding my expectations, there is room for improvement, particularly in the studio's performance. Sometimes, it takes a while to open and launch workflows, and this speed issue could be addressed. Additionally, the support could be improved, especially regarding the availability and expertise of support engineers.

Overall, UiPath is relatively straightforward, but there are opportunities to simplify activities. Sometimes, I've hit roadblocks while developing RPA jobs and found it difficult to find the answer. I can usually resolve a problem through a support ticket or an online search.

Setting up the infrastructure with different virtual desktops and making the connections stable in our environment present challenges. More direction on cleaning up these issues would be useful.

UiPath could offer better support for operations. It has all these cool features, but when you still need to build and run these bots. You need to have more features that make it easier to run bots, and they require fewer people to maintain.

The messages and alerts that Orchestrator generates are a little overwhelming. I'd like them to be filtered down to the most actionable things I need to look at. For many things, we set up an automation that will send an email summarizing things to the stakeholders for the automation. With any of these types of things, you're generating notices, emails, and things, so you want to focus on some things that need your attention.

My biggest problem is that UiPath is growing so fast and adding integration with so many different products that it's hard to keep up. The COEs at various companies and our developers aren't able to keep pace with what's happening. It's a good problem to have. I'm not complaining, but there are so many features and little time for developers to learn and implement them. If you need something new like a CICD pipeline or somebody for a test suite or to work with Document Understanding, you can't use our existing staff because they don't have the skills. Now, I need to go out and hire more people. I need to reduce the company's size to save money but also spend more to hire.

UiPath's pricing could be improved. The margins for us as a bottom-level tier partner are not great, which can be a hindrance, particularly when we present it to the customer. Other than that, I don't have any areas of improvement at the moment due to our limited experience. Maybe after six months to a year, we might have more feedback.

There's a push for cloud-based operations, but I prefer to develop things on the desktop. I'd appreciate the ability to develop things on the desktop and roll them out concurrently on the cloud.

There are small issues, such as the Action Center not auto-refreshing. The user has to keep clicking "refresh." It's minor, but if you're waiting for something in your queue, you don't want to sit there and keep clicking. Logging could be improved, and there are a few connectors where I would like to see enhancements, but nothing major.

The licensing policies and concepts change almost yearly, leading to difficult negotiations. All components are licensed differently, and it would be more straightforward to adopt new features if they were included in the same bundle.

Data integration is the biggest opportunity for improvement. We need quick connections to our complex in-house databases to set up automations more efficiently. It's time-consuming to connect those large databases.

Although improvements have been made, such as auto-healing, there is room for improvement. Changes in the UI can break automations. If you upgrade from Windows 10 to 11, you may need to rewrite some of those UI selectors completely. That is probably the biggest weakness that I can think of.

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

Being able to escalate quickly is not a strength for UiPath and may be a focus area.

We are looking to add AI, such as generative AI, but it requires our organization to implement it. UiPath's chatbots and autopilot require UiPath Assistant on every machine, which is challenging because many people use the same machine in the hospital. Everyone knows how to use Microsoft Copilot or ChatGPT. Even a non-technical user can go on OpenAI.com and start chatting. But with UiPath, if you want to use their chatbot or autopilot, you need UiPath Assistant.

While not a negative remark toward UiPath itself, our initial partner was limited in helping us achieve our goals. We are now directly working with UiPath support, which has been exceptional.

It would be helpful to be able to double-click and drill down into the data we see in the APIs and get a little more interactivity, especially in the Studio and Studio Web. I want to be able to pull in fields dynamically.

UiPath could be more intuitive in how it formats strings, variables, or databases. This can sometimes be difficult, even for someone with a computer science background. Additionally, some tasks require a team effort as one person can get overwhelmed or discouraged.

It would help if UiPath fixed bugs in the software before they updated.

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

The documentation related to new releases needs improvement. It should provide a clear understanding of what was present in the old release, what's new, and how it affects users.

I would love more integration with Third-Party applications. Expanding the library of pre-built, plug-and-play connectors to include more industry-specific applications.

I found the UiPath Academy courses to be a bit rigid in their curriculum. It was more beneficial for me to learn from the forums and YouTube videos. Their courses were tailored to particular roles, with a course on UiPath in data science being heavily focused on Excel. While it was a well-structured course, it didn't align with my job's limited use of Excel. Overall, their courses are well-built, but I found YouTube a more suitable learning platform for my needs. UiPath Studio provides comprehensive tools and libraries for building automation, but it lacks a built-in feature to generate consolidated reports after automation runs, detailing successes, failures, and operational features. This absence of detailed logging information makes it difficult to troubleshoot issues and identify whether the problem lies within the application or the automation itself. While UiPath's orchestrator website provides some information, it's insufficient for demonstrating automation runs and accomplished features to stakeholders. Although a future release may address this, the lack of robust reporting capabilities remains a significant area for improvement. Additionally, UiPath's diverse suite of licenses can confuse end-users, making it challenging to determine the most suitable option. While the company has improved features, the increased number of licenses creates a knowledge gap between what's available and user understanding. Clearer explanations of each license would simplify decision-making for potential users and streamline adoption.

The Excel operation needs some modifications. Image processing is also crucial. For example, if the image is clear, UiPath can easily read it. If the image needs clarification, UiPath can't read the object easily. To some extent, Excel automation, especially handling macros, needs improvement. UiPath needs a comprehensive feature set for automating Excel and has limited options. In some cases, we must use macro-enabled Excel files. Therefore, Excel automation and OCR require enhancements.

I do not have any complaints about the tools themselves. They work very well. The only problem is the cost. It was more accessible initially, and we could have more resources with the same license. Now, the license is different, and we need a license for each tool that we have, so it is not very accessible to have all of the tools for installation.

I have just generated the default pilot. I believe another option for the tool could be voice interaction. For example, similar to using assistants like Alexa, it would be beneficial to integrate voice commands with the UI to create an Excel spreadsheet and populate a data table.

UiPath's cost can be prohibitive, and the sheer number of licensing options they offer makes it difficult to choose the right one, creating a confusing selection process. Currently, UiPath doesn't provide automatic notifications for known bugs in new releases. This means we're left to discover and report them ourselves. Ideally, I'd like to receive updates on these known issues from UiPath to streamline the automation process. UiPath implementing a feature like Microsoft's CoPilot would significantly enhance our development experience by offering assistance in building automation.

UiPath has matured and offers a wide range of packages. However, some users feel these packages aren't easily adaptable or customizable. Ideally, UiPath could provide more open models for users to modify and tailor to specific needs. Additionally, users would appreciate more activities and features related to Microsoft Office applications, given their wide use. While UiPath acknowledges this need with some activities for OneDrive and SharePoint, there's a gap compared to other platforms. UiPath's licensing costs are a major consideration. While the platform offers valuable features and user-friendly tools, its pricing can be a barrier for some customers seeking more affordable options. This high cost is a key reason users switch to Power Automate, which integrates well with Office applications but lacks UiPath's breadth of automation capabilities. UiPath's extensive features come at a premium price, leading some customers to explore alternatives like Power Automate or open-source solutions. While these alternatives have limitations, UiPath's recent 30 percent license cost increase has prompted even established users to re-evaluate their options.

Automation Hub needs to improve a lot. About two years back, it kept on crashing. It has improved a lot. We use it but not to a great extent. We try to build our own dashboards by using any of the data analytics tools. It should give real-time data, and the integration with the servers is not that great. It can be because of the infrastructure that we have. They can also consider integration with other automation tools because nowadays, a company does not have one automation tool or RPA tool. A company has multiple RPA tools. They can think of integrating the data from other automation tools in one automation hub so that it becomes centralized.

The pricing is high and has room for improvement. I find UiPath's development environment to be challenging. Ideally, I'd prefer a more user-friendly approach like Blue Prism's, which utilizes a building block concept.

Communication mining and process mining can be enhanced in UiPath. UiPath should improve its licensing because its competitors offer a cheaper and more sustainable model for even small-scale industries. Any company that wants to adopt UiPath has to pay straight away and then use it.

We use intelligent automation for things like document processing. There is a validation center where the ML model extracts some values, and we can validate if it's correct. That aspect could be improved a little. The percentage of values extracted without validation could be increased. It's currently an attended process, but they should give you the option of making it unattended.

The community version of UiPath has a limited feature set, which can make it challenging for users to fully explore its capabilities without purchasing the enterprise version. Offering a trial period for all features could provide a more comprehensive evaluation experience for potential users.

It should have better integration with Microsoft applications such as Excel, SharePoint, Outlook, etc. Power Automate is better for communicating with Microsoft Office applications. With UiPath, we have some difficulty communicating with the Microsoft Office applications. This is the only weakness that I have come across.

UiPath is an RPA solution, but I have never explored the AI part of it. I am unsure if it has an AI element or not. Merging RPA with AI and ChatGPT would be beneficial. Adding more AI could help in small tasks that require intelligence or machine learning, leading to the next stage of automation.

Computational text recognition has room for improvement as it is not 100 percent accurate.

One area that could be improved is how we access the UiPath Academy courses. While it's fantastic that each course provides an assignment, it would be more convenient if we could view the solutions directly within the platform rather than downloading them each time and opening them in our individual UiPath Studio applications. Ideally, there would be an interface integrated into the course platform itself where we could access and review the solutions directly within the browser. This would save time and streamline the learning process. In Automation Anywhere, each line of code is displayed in a list view, offering clearer visibility. In contrast, UiPath condenses everything into a boxed view or flowchart, which can become cumbersome when dealing with numerous intricate conditions. Pinpointing specific segments for modification within such a condensed format proves challenging. Therefore, UiPath's UI design could benefit from an overhaul to enhance clarity and ease of navigation, especially for managing complex workflows.

I'd like to see the accuracy improved. Sometimes the development works fine. Other times, it requires some small changes in the development. They could add enhancements in AI technology that could be helpful for everyday developers.

* RPA AI capabilities - UiPath is leading in this area. * UiPath should focus more on recommendations of process automation based on ERP Applications like Oracle, SAP etc. They should also provide a list of possible RPA cases as per departments, processes and based on various industry domains. * More on RPA Governance features to be provided out of the box. * RPA Capabilities with IVR Channels to address voice commands will be a game changer for Customer call center cases.

These are my best 3 upgrades for the item:

Improved Dashboards from Orchestrator - we need simple to make SQL questions, preferably not using outsider programming, this ought to permit following of cases, memorable patterns, time to measure and so on I know there are some essential dashboards yet they are not incredible. Kibana is fine for logging however I'm more inspired by the Database - is it conceivable to point Kibana at the DB, if so that could be a pleasant arrangement as Kibana is an exceptionally beautiful apparatus .

Orchestrator should come as an installer bundle. The entirety of the setup choices ought to be alternatives inside a GUI installer. Introducing Orchestrator from Powershell is certainly not a decent choice and it looks excessively disengaged from the Studio Package. I don't think Studio and Orchestrator should be joined into a similar item (a la Blue Prism) however the installer for Orchestrator should be simpler.

The originator ought to be upgraded for certain fundamental custom exercises to improve the visual perspective. I figure it ought to be quite simple to a few additional shapes which duplicate the succession and allot exercises. These ought to be more modest and interactive to grow however at an undeniable level ought to take after a work process guide like Visio or Adonis. The Sequence and Assign boxes are too enormous and they make a fundamental cycle look untidy. I realize you are confined by WWF yet I am certain you could several custom exercises to supplant these.

We sometimes use the AI functionality mainly for document scanning but at the time it was poor and had room for improvement. The operation costs have room for improvement.

While doing web automation, I am facing a selector issue. In the web portal, we need to capture a screen element. For capturing the screen element, when I run the job the next time, it fails because the limit is not recognized. It is very difficult to make the selector stable. It is not easy.

UiPath should expand its coding options and reduce its dependency on third-party resources. There should also be more flexible licenses for smaller businesses. It's hard for small companies to estimate the cost of adding users in their final budgets. UiPath could also improve error handling and capture a little more information about the execution of your processes.

For UiPath Orchestrator and Studio, if I want to watch the performance of my machines at a specific time or time range, there is no option for that. There are options for one day or week, but there is no option to specify a date such as from Nov 1 to Nov 3. This option should be there for queues and monitoring.

If we want to learn something new about UiPath, we sometimes cannot learn it directly from the UiPath Academy. We have to go and search on the web. It takes a few searches to find the solution. We do find it, but it takes time. UiPath should give the solution in one area.

UiPath is expensive, and its cost could be reduced to make it more accessible to small and medium-sized businesses that could benefit from it. The orchestrator and licensing cost should be flexible instead of hard-coded licensing. UiPath is limited to one application at a time and cannot process two applications simultaneously. This functionality could be improved to support dual browsing, making it more efficient.

Assessing an AI center's role in orchestrating various elements of AI capabilities is quite constrained.

There are instances when the introduction of new features or concepts can be a bit overwhelming for users.

In Action Center, saving progress in data validation, specifically for table content, is currently not available. There should be more clarity around the feedback loop along with the auto-update feature when you deploy machine learning packages. They should give some rule-based options so that if the confidence is returned higher than the previous model trained, then it would auto-deploy. If it is less, then it should send you an email rather than auto-deploy. With task assignment, if there was a round-robin feature within the bucket to automatically assign it to a certain group of people, that would be helpful. There should be the ability to add custom fields to validation tasks because there is a lot of potential for it. It would be helpful when somebody needs to identify a scenario. For example, we have a customer who is processing rate sheets for trucking, and sometimes, depending on their customer, they have an all-in rate versus an adding fuel mileage rate. If they are able to specify that, even if it does not say it on the rate sheet, it would allow them to process more documents successfully. We use UiPath's AI Center, but some clarity is missing around when to use AI Center versus when to use the Document Understanding module within Orchestrator. We are trying to figure out the benefit of one versus the other. We have also seen that the out-of-the-box models that we train versus a custom model that we train with the same data end up with the same output result at the end. We are trying to see where these out-of-the-box models are providing value if we are going to take the time to train them.

Simplification and adaptability for smaller businesses would be a welcome enhancement.

The hardest part is popularizing UiPath among our employees.

The support team could be more responsive and helpful.

There's room for enhancement, particularly in the support department and in the area of reporting, to provide a more robust product for gathering insights.

Integrating with tools such as Asana or other service and project management platforms would be a valuable enhancement.

There is room for improvement in browser automation, particularly regarding access and success rates. Success and failure recognition are key areas to focus on.

Improving financial and recording operations through the use of charts would be advantageous.

The concept of process analysis would be helpful. Having a tool that can assess the entire workflow of an automation created by someone would be highly beneficial. This tool could identify areas where enhancements or improvements are feasible, simplifying the process of refining and optimizing automation workflows. In the case of case number categorization, we encountered an issue. While creating the automation, the system was designed to detect and categorize cases into various specified categories.

There are several areas where I see room for improvement in the tool. One of these areas would be a more solutions-oriented pricing structure. This is because the platform requires a multitude of building blocks even for the simplest use cases and when dealing with newer clients, this can be challenging. One area where I'd appreciate additional or new features is in the realm of insights.

Updating the tool across multiple virtual machines can be time-consuming and somewhat cumbersome. It would be more convenient if this process could be automated.

The UiPath Academy Orchestrator training needs to be updated to reflect the recent changes.

Its pricing changed again this year. I do not know why it just went up, but I do not like that. This is something that I would like them to improve for sure. It would be nice to have the possibility to change the values in the middle of the debug. For example, I am debugging a process, and I write at a place. The value of that level is one, but I want to see the results of it if I change it to two. It does not seem possible in UiPath. It is possible in other software, but in UiPath, it is not yet possible.

An area for improvement I saw in UiPath is API integration, particularly with Microsoft. If you compare my experience with Power Automate in terms of integration, it is seamless, and you don't have to create trust with other applications. Integration via Power Automate is easy, more of dragging and dropping and then starting, which is still not the case with UiPath, so that should be improved.

Currently, we have a lot of data extraction models in UiPath. Still, sometimes the data extraction model needs improvement. For example, extracting the data from various kinds of complex documents. Still, compared to the other automation tools, this works way better. The solution needs to offer more integrations.

We have two versions of UiPath: on-premise and cloud. With the on-premise version, we have good control and flexibility. However, the cloud version is less flexible and we often receive errors. We would like UiPath to make some enhancements to the cloud version to provide more flexibility for OCRs, email models, and AI centers. This would allow us to provide better service to our customers.

I would like to see improved support and cost management for advanced certification. The cost is too high for many people to afford.

UiPath's built-in integration with Python scripts could be more robust so that I do not have to depend on another technology and I can do everything on one platform. Each program you write on UiPath contributes to bot consumption and utilization. As you add more bots, your costs will increase for more actions. Python is open-source, so it is totally free. Depending on our automation needs, we go back and forth between these two technologies. Better integration between these two tools will help organizations cover all areas of automation without more cost-effectively.

UiPath can improve its AI and optical character recognition or OCR. Currently, reading digital images or PDF documents by UiPath is a huge challenge. I request UiPath to improve the OCR recognition.

Sometimes, the company's processes are very complex, and it's very hard to implement UiPath. It also makes mistakes. Understanding your systems by yourself and implementing UiPath into your company processes is the hardest part. This could be improved so that the companies can easily implement the solution.

I see UiPath as a practical product that is trying to achieve end-to-end automation or end-to-end processing. They are playing in this space and bringing their AI connectivity or components into their product. However, I think the only downside is that, as we have seen recently, for some of the processes we have automated, we have documentation on the technical elements that we have automated, but people have forgotten the business rules. UiPath has a task capture product or a process mining product but it could be improved by capturing the business process and then how the automation that we have developed feeds into that overall business process, and making that available to the business so that they know what the business processes are. UiPath does not have a delivery product. For example, when we go into Microsoft DevOps, UiPath does not do that. Once we have identified the process and have coded it in UiPath, there is nothing to tell us about how we deliver that process, and who is assigned to a task to build the components. There is no project management or DevOps delivery pipeline model inside UiPath, so we cannot manage the development.

I want UiPath Data Service to be expanded. It must include many more features as an online database. Many online databases like QuickBase and Force.com are 100 times better than UiPath Data Service. Not sure why UiPath is not adding such features to Data Service. The product does not provide features for chatbot development. It is one of the reasons why people do not use UiPath because they have to use a different tool for chatbot development. Competitors like Microsoft have all process automation capabilities in their Power Platform. They have RPA, attended bots, unattended bots, application development, databases, and chatbots. UiPath has not gotten into chatbots for several years. They are doing many things except chatbots. I express the need for chatbots in every insider event I attend. UiPath’s team says it will take it to the product management group. But nothing happens after that. I want a product for chatbot development from UiPath without having to purchase licenses from a third-party company. The documentation needs a lot of work. The documentation is "boring". They just mention a feature and add one line about what it does. I wish the documentation had examples. The document should be associated with a video or sample code. The documentation is too minimal. People give many sample codes and links to their YouTube videos in the forum. The uipath forum is much richer than the documentation.

Saudi has two calendars. UiPath does not support the Hijri date. They should add it in future releases. We also face regular issues while parsing from right to left and left to right. The Arabic language is not related to the platform. We have Arabic scripts which are sometimes difficult to understand. Also, the license is complicated. The add-ons are not well documented. When we offer and pitch to the customer, sometimes we get confused about which one to offer based on the third-party tools. The solution must focus on microservices and web-based platform building. It would be fantastic if they could produce web applications connected automatically to UiPath. OutSystems is a low-code platform for building web-based and mobile applications. If such features are available in UiPath, it will eliminate the need to integrate with different applications. We can directly build applications using UiPath.

UiPath should be able to adapt to other operating systems like Linux or macOS. The tool must reduce the activity required for workflow design. It should be made similar to Visual Studio. It should provide a better way to analyze the recursion functions.

Unfortunately, I used to be a lover of their Slack channel and people don't seem so responsive there anymore. Unfortunately, I've gotten away from using their Slack channel. That would have been a really good way for me to get some help from the community, yet I don't find it helpful anymore. They're working on integrating their version of a chat. They're starting with Studio Xpress or StudioWeb. I don't use StudioWeb and I don't use StudioX, however, I would love to have that type of feature in Studio. I could use it across the board, not just in Studio, but in Assist. Their error messaging could use some improvement. More times than not an error that you receive is accurate or not clear. In terms of missing features, I can't think of any. They are always ten steps ahead.

One functionality we would like to see is OCR.

UiPath helps with digital transformation at the outset, but I focus on the amount of runtime support needed for managing bots. If a bot is going to save four to six onshore resources, at least one offshore resource is needed to support it. That is one area where UiPath, Automation Anywhere, and every automation software has to focus. A lot of bots are highly sensitive. Even the slightest change in screen behavior or a small change in the process and, many times, they are not intelligent enough to run on their own. That means there is a high level of dependence on the support team. Automation software providers need to improve on this. Also, UiPath could bring in a type of low-code or no-code automation so that it can be used by the masses instead of only by technically proficient people to develop solutions. Low-code or no-code automations would be really helpful. In addition, for intelligent automation to become really robust, a lot of features need to be added, and the accuracy of the model has to be improved. Right now, if I am going to implement any UiPath or AI solution, in the beginning, it will only be 30 to 40 percent accurate. It doesn't get to 70 to 80 percent. These are the types of things that need to be improved in UiPath.

I would like to see the setup improved. First we install it, then we log in with Orchestrator, and then we have to log in to the UiPath website. I would like all this to be merged into one setup.

We cannot utilize the UiPath community edition license to operate any bots that we have created using that version in an enterprise environment. This is because we are obligated to employ UiPath Studio, which necessitates a distinct license for professional use.

The UiPath Community does not provide version control for the community edition. Let's say I'm currently using a specific version, and then it automatically upgrades the community version to the latest version without the user having the option to decide whether to update or not. Consequently, we cannot use the older versions in the UiPath community edition. I encountered some issues with my local machine. I created one of the bots using a different version from the community variation, there were problems with compatibility between different versions in UiPath. While those issues used to exist, currently, it has been a long time since I last modified any of the workflows and migrated between servers and my local machine. I'm not entirely certain at the moment, but previously, there were instances where a particular activity in one version would not work in another version and would result in failure. Additionally, sometimes the select task would not identify the select areas in the actual application, even though it worked on the validators. These scenarios are rare but they do occur.

UiPath's price has room for improvement.

The document understanding has room for improvement.

On the investment side, it is a huge investment, especially with the current situation in Sri Lanka. If they can reduce the price or provide affordable packages, it will be very helpful. On the development side, there are already so many new capabilities. They are also adding more AI capabilities. I have seen some of the users using AI tools, but I have not worked on them much.

I would like to have the ability to make changes at different stages of the development process without having to start from the beginning each time. Automating with UiPath is not as easy as it appears in the advertisements.

UiPath is not easy to work with, as a vendor, from a partner perspective. They are difficult to deal with.

There can be technical issues, but it's rarely about a server quitting. They are more like connectivity, platform, and software version issues, but there are no issues with UiPath performance. I would also like to see UiPath assist clients in scaling up their usage of the application because most of our clients had trouble expanding their usage into other departments. It was hard for them to calculate the exact value they were getting. Some of our clients were flying blind. Some of our clients hadn't really seen enormous impact from implementing and using automation yet. They had just started, and they saw the value in it, but it was hard for them to expand or add more value to automations with UiPath.

It would be beneficial to have the capability to track defects during the regression testing of applications.

Although AI functionality has improved in its ability to automate more complex or involved processes in the past five years, there is still ample room for further improvement. The APIs are predominantly on-premises-focused, and there should be greater availability of cloud-based APIs. There are workflows in which we use AI to take screenshots to assist us in making decisions, and these workflows need improvement.

AI machine learning has room for improvement. We use Google and Microsoft services. In some ways, Microsoft is more straightforward when we need to train a model compared to UiPath. There comes a point when we integrate UiPath with Microsoft Cognitive Services. For instance, we will also pay for these Microsoft Cognitive Services, not only for the UiPath license. It has an additional cost. However, in terms of usability, my impression is that Microsoft Cognitive Services are faster to configure and provide quicker results than UiPath document understanding, for example.

We would like to use several modules of UiPath, but they are very costly. All the additional features that we need are there, but they are in the modules that we have not bought. Its stability could have been better.

On the Orchestrator side, I would like to see more controls and conditions for RPA managers. If they advanced in those areas, it would help.

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

We have used UiPath Academy courses for process mining. For RPA, we have some KPIs for developers to complete their education. In UiPath Academy courses, they have an option for the Turkish language for videos, but they are always in English. They should correct that. UiPath should integrate more machine learning and have more machine learning processes. In their development system, they have some machine learning tools, but they should increase them. With robots and structured data, in my opinion, we can use machine learning. The robots should also use machine learning to create some AI models. Its price should be reduced.

The artificial intelligence and machine learning features are good, but there is some room for improvement.

It isn't clear how to use UiPath to implement some use cases like chatbots, so we need to spend a lot of time searching for documentation on the web. To discover how to do these automations, you need to read and figure things out through trial and error.

The data team support that provides the UI and the chat services has room for improvement.

In the UiPath Community, a few questions get resolved and a few questions remain unresolved. UiPath has a big user community, but it needs to grow more. For example, during development, we might face some hurdles or hiccups while doing some of the tasks that we don't do on a daily basis, such as executing some API calls and getting some data. We faced some issues related to that, but when we searched for or asked about such issues in the UiPath Community, out of 10 questions, five to six questions remained unanswered. We had to resolve them on our own. So, UiPath needs to improve its community. They can offer some kind of reward for answering the questions asked in the community. It would be helpful if UiPath could provide developers to help us with the on-premises setup. Without that, we have to figure out how we do the setup. Its cost could also be better. We need to have a license for every robot, and it isn't possible for us to be able to run UiPath in our on-premises environment based on our usage. Even if we need to run a robot for an hour, we need to get a license for one year.

The user interface needs a little bit of improvement because it looks a little cheap due to being a very old tool. Otherwise, it works well. I would also like to see the ability for applications to work offline. Currently, they only work when online. If that is possible, that should be included in a future release.

Sometimes, UiPath becomes a little laggy when we move from one page to another.

The interactive selection could be more accurate. The customer support could be faster.

Handling unstructured data is challenging because UiPath works best with structured data. It could also be better at handling complex tasks. UiPath doesn't work as expected when automating tasks that require a high degree of decision-making.

UiPath can probably work on improving the AI features. We tried UiPath's AI functionality in our automation program. We did some research on that, but right now, nothing is in production. When we did some research, we weren't getting the expected results. We weren't completely satisfied with the results, so we put it aside. It could be a drawback on our side in terms of learning the tool. In terms of additional features, UiPath already has a plethora of options. All our needs are fulfilled by the features that are currently available.

It sometimes lags when internet connectivity is poor. It depends on the location. Otherwise, it is the most fantastic tool ever.

The main disadvantage that I have identified in the Document Understanding is in table extraction. If the table size is large and goes to the next page, we are unable to extract it with Document Understanding. I hear that there is a solution for that but I have to find it. There are other extraction features that Document Understanding doesn't have and clients go for ABBYY Vantage or Google document AI and it becomes expensive for them because they have to purchase a UiPath license and the other solution's license. With the competition in the market, they have to improve. They can't settle and say, "We are at the top." They have to improve invoice processing, that is the most important thing, and that's where Document Understanding comes in. We need to get to the point where a customer does not look at any other OCR engines. They have to improve Document Understanding for invoice processing.

We have used it with Windows and it has been perfect. But recently, we tried it with Linux and we faced some issues regarding this automation. The auto-recording didn't happen as much as in other operating systems. They need to add more user-friendly automation and templates for that. They don't have many templates for other operating systems.

For small use cases, it would be great to have independent runner licenses with costs that are comparable to those of Power Automate. Then, UiPath would be a better alternative. The AI functionality was not that effective in complex scenarios when I used it some time ago. I would like to see a universal recorder feature added so that we can record Excel macros. You could then click a button to record the screen, and then all the actions across applications would be recorded. This functionality is available already in Automation Anywhere, but the last time I checked, it was not available in UiPath.

The reporting part of Orchestrator could be improved. For example, UiPath could automatically email us if there are errors. Adding this feature would help us.

The dashboard view could be more visually appealing. Dashboards in any software should stand out with colors, numbers, and other things, but in UiPath, the dashboard is not that visually appealing. The UiPath team could make it more visually appealing for us to get more insights. Another improvement area is related to product updates. Earlier, we used to get monthly updates about the product, but that has stopped now. If they could bring that back, it'll be very good. We have recently tried the AI functionality. There is a lot of learning that we need to do with regard to AI. It's good, but it's not as smooth as Orchestrator or Studio. The AI aspect of the product could be better. We're currently working on allowing the AI to automatically detect areas where automation can be brought in and efficiency can be improved. That needs some more refinement. It's currently not straightforward. Sometimes, it just repeats whatever it said previously, so nothing new comes out of it. The AI aspect of the product can be much more refined. Apart from that, I don't have anything else. It's a well-thought-out and complete product. It's very easy to use and easy to understand.

A task capture feature enables you to capture the workflow from a process and record it. This feature isn't as specific as I would like. It should be able to capture every detail. The same goes for process mining when it comes to system loads. It's already the best, but I think it could be better. I need all details of a log file from every software and ERP to discover the pain points and bottlenecks. It usually understands where the most automation value is delivered but could generate more valuable information. Sometimes it's the same data from a different ERP, but it doesn't generate the same insight from it 100 percent. There's a slight difference, whereas they are supposed to be practically the same. I also think the UiPath community needs more attention in terms of how they engage with the community and what they recommend. I find that they hardly engage with the community compared to others. To be clear, I think they are doing well, but they could do better at engaging with the community and encouraging community members to engage with one another. I feel like it's not the most active community with the most active management. At the same time, there's also much information in the community, and they're always sharing information with us. Still, I think UiPath could achieve a better experience by putting a little more effort into the forums.

Their licensing is poorly constructed. It's too complicated and not well thought out. They also outsourced their support model, which sadly has become less friendly and more automated. It's very much in the early days, but another area they can continue to look at is bots building robots—the ability to take a task capture and turn that into an automation. There are always concerns over that: Who's going to police the police?

Our solution is on-premises so we are unable to utilize phone apps.

Most of our automations have been without a user interface and we need the ability to interact with users directly. That should be coming in the next release for us.

Initial deployment is very complex and some integrators need better training.

While it is the best tool ever, we decided that the user interaction might not actually be the greatest thing ever.

I have been working on UiPath Apps for the last six months, and there are a few things to improve. The tables are not working properly. There are issues with the table display and the filter function in the tables. There is also an alignment issue. You can't edit the alignment of buttons. There is also a lack of tutorials. They have a lot more functions, but there aren't enough tutorials to know how to use all the functions. They have free training in UiPath Academy, which is good, but the way of training is not impressive. They're using the textual format. They are providing lots of documents to read. It would be more effective if they were in video format. It takes more time to read and understand the content in text format.

What I'd like to see is more tutorial videos on YouTube. Maybe they could have a YouTube channel, and the community could empower more content creators to make how-to videos. When clients call us with issues, we wouldn't have to explain. If a client using Azure has an issue, we assign an engineer. Let's say you still have a problem after the engineer has consulted with you and referred you to the official documentation. It would be helpful if there were a content creator on YouTube to explain the problem in an accessible way.

The developer studio could be improved. There have been glitches, but it improved from year to year.

I faced a problem when a new version of UiPath Studio didn't work with an older version of the packages that were part of our project. The problem is that when I have to change something just a bit, I actually have to rebuild the automation with new versions of these libraries. There is no backward compatibility. This question was addressed to an engineer from UiPath in the Community but I haven't gotten an answer. This is quite a hard question. So, I just create new automations with new approaches, which takes some time.

The product could be made a little less glitchy. Specifically, when too many users are working at the same time, it hangs a little bit here and there. In a future release, I would like to see drag-and-drop functionality in the robot creation process within Orchestrator. As of now, it is not available there. It would be helpful because from there, it is easy to create a process flow. Instead of switching between multiple menus and multiple tabs, we can do it from the Orchestrator or the main menu.

UiPath's interface and user experience could be improved. The name is UiPath, but their UI is not that great. It's outdated. It seems like a 2014 or 2015 software. They should look at other products on the market. Another thing is that UiPath lacks online training resources. Maybe they can start their own YouTube channel. You have to rely on the documentation to learn. There are some resources, but they aren't available on the official site.

The pricing could be more friendly.

It can be improved in terms of platform integration. It is platform-independent, but it should be easy to integrate with different platforms, such as Windows, Linux, Cloud, etc. If I am using AWS for my server response, I should be able to integrate that into UiPath. If I can get some manuals along with the product, it will be good to see all the features that are available in it.

When I started working with UiPath, there were no activities for SAP, but in the version that I'm using right now, there are SAP activities or SAP modules. Previously, I had to code everything from user login to user logout, but now, all the activities are available. I just have to drag and drop and give the username and password. I don't have to do it from scratch. It would be great if they can include activities for all of the most common CRMs and ERPs. They can integrate it with different activities for the most common systems.

UiPath is adding new features every month, and most things are disseminated through the community, so users can give feedback. A few months back, I recommended that UiPath adopt an actions platform for downloading and exporting documents for two or three extensions. This is not enough. We're using more extensions consistently, and they change within one or two hours, but the details are set within the application. It would be better if we could customize Orchestrator more. As enterprise users, we need more flexibility to customize and filter fields so we can monitor everything.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

UiPath updates its software every year. The problem is the support for the old code. For example, right now I'm using the 2021 10.3 version. If I have developed a code three years back and I want to update the packages, it won't work as expected. They do not follow up with support for the old version. Therefore, a person has to exclusively work again with the old robot to make it compatible with the new version.

They could work to improve the user community. For example, having a common place to discuss items. They could improve user forums. That way, we can share knowledge and experiences across different industries.

They can certainly improve their Automation Hub, which is their centralized place to gather new opportunities. The improvement could be, in part, in the capabilities. For example, it would help if there were a centralized dashboard. Maybe they could combine Insights and Automation Hub into one solution. And they also need to revisit the pricing model of Automation Hub. It is an expensive functionality that clients don't really want to pay for. They feel that it should be part of the program and available out-of-the-box. Because it's not, clients just do things using an Excel sheet.

I have used the AI functionality for PDF automations. In these processes, the bot is able to capture the data properly about 70 to 80 percent of the time. But if a document is not proper or it isn't handled the right way, the bot struggles to get the required data. UiPath has to work on this aspect so that the bot will be able to completely capture the data. There is also room for improvement in the area of third-party integrations. In the last week I have gone through a video for an integration service, but it did not show things end-to-end. Rather, they just explained the connection details only. After performing the steps they showed, I was not able to get things working properly in my process.

It took quite a bit of time to understand some of the document types. Some of the documents were already pre-built, but some of the documents were new, and it took us quite a bit of time to get it to train on those documents. If there was any variation, we had to re-train it. It took longer than expected.

Features are on track, however, service and cost models need to be reviewed to be market sensitive and related to the industry. Providing a great product at the wrong price without consideration to the economic conditions of the markets within which it is being offered, creates barriers and another product is sure to fill the void. Closer integration with machine learning frameworks and matrix processing can be improved and will benefit low-cost/entry-level uptake and activation for some clients. Although pass-through options exist and have been activated, this is not sufficient to create encapsulated learning within the organizations and serves to improve third-party algorithms with added exposure to privacy (information systems security management) risks.

The database connectors I found are not fully free and expire after 30 days. That is something I would like looked at for MongoDB specifically. With regards to this, I was working on a project that needed a robot to read data from a MongoDB database. To achieve this, I used the CDATA ODBC driver because I couldn't find a direct Activity to achieve this from Studio. See the link to the CDATA ODBC driver for UiPath here www.cdata.com/kb/tech/... It would also be great to have UiPath Insights included in the free Orchestrator. The Insights module is currently only available for paid licenses. It would be great for developers to have it included in the free version because then we could try it out.

There are some external dependencies. When we have APIs available, UiPath does have that option that we can hook into APIs. That's really where I'd like to be down the line, more like hooking into APIs, data warehouses, so that you don't have to worry too much about the screen scraping functionality, even though that's a great big part of what it does. I would really like the ability to bring OCR connectors into StudioX, if possible. Right now we're only using OCR and Studio as that's where the plugins are available. I don't know enough about the back end of what makes this feasible versus not feasible. However, at the moment, with StudioX, you can only really read and digitize PDFs. If they can bring in the OCR connectors, they'd allow citizen developers to be able to read in a larger breadth of documents that they would generally need Studio to do.

It's been four years of practice and we've matured with the traditional RPA candidates. We have a strong foundation with what we have showcased to our business folks, and we are good with the healthy background that we are building. However, when it comes to the roadmap of what's next, that is where we are not clear. While we get the concepts, bringing them to reality is looking to be quite a challenge. We are unsure as to if UiPath can actually bring our vision to life. UiPath is very clear in defining items such as this is what the high automation needs, this is what the process planning needs. We are getting clarity into those concepts and we are able to explain that and take that back into leadership to get other approvals. They are able to understand what UiPath is talking about within these different concepts. Really, it's just figuring out whether we have the right arrangement at this point and if UiPath can get us there.

The forum's a great place, however, for a new person, it was better some years ago. It's grown too fast, and it's not that nimble. Previously, if you asked questions, the response time was quicker. Since I've learned UiPath, there's so many more people rushing and getting into it. With the demand for RPA jobs, the ratio of expertise to novices is very, very low. Before you had a small community and you had a lot of experts and just a few new people trickling in at a time. The influx of new people, it's just growing factor by factor. Where previously there was one person that only had a few questions to answer, now maybe that ratio is now 20 or 30 people. You're not going to get the answers that you need as fast. Luckily, the quality of the Academy is so good, if you look around, you can eventually figure things out. The issue is that, with so many people, a lot of questions are getting asked before anyone even looks to see if an answer is already there. It tends to make it harder to find relevant, real questions that need to be answered. There are people who are not doing the due diligence and looking at the tags and spending a little extra time before throwing the question out. It makes that part hard to manage. With people that have already been up-skilled, or already been skilled in the past, UiPath needs to find a way to send some sort of notification to them when items update or change. They need to send out a message to experienced developers to say: “Hey, look at this and push it out." If you're not going to the Academy and looking for something new, there needs to be some sort of way to say: “Hey, you've been certified. You haven't been in this course. You should look at these things.” I started looking at the Academy and found new elements. When I mentioned something, like, "What's that?" the new guys were aware due to the fact that it was in the Academy from when they started and was not there when I finished. Basically, just having some sort of mechanism for spreading awareness to existing developers, or pushing something out to them, maybe even through the interface, would be helpful. Whether it’s a little highlight or a little icon to alert users to “hey, here’s something new, something pushed out.” And it’s not just something where you have to go in and read some boring five or six pages of notes, to know that this thing is there. It needs to be visual.

The license model changing every year can be a little bit frustrating. It's hard sometimes when things go from being robot-based to being runtime-based. Some federal users are still on the 2019 orchestrator or even a 2018 orchestrator. However, by being on them, they can't take advantage of modern folders. This issue is, once they get upgraded to 2020, and they start using modern folders, essentially you shouldn't really be using plastic folders anymore. Some of their frustrations aren't really long-term frustrations. Orchestrators have gotten really popular over the last few years. There are certain things that have made it so much better. That said, we're still in that transition where clients have been using classic folders and then they upgrade and they're going to have to change everything. Hopefully, they don't have to do it more than when they upgrade past 2020. One of my clients upgraded their production environment from the 2019 orchestrator to the 2020 and everything was in plastic folders and I advised them to switch to modern folders and it was a pain. Once it was taken care of, it was great. It's just that it took a lot of convincing to tell them why it was better.

The solution needs resource locking. This kind of leads toward scaling which is one challenge. It's not major. However, it is when you have multiple bots running the same process and they need to access the same piece of information to read and write. There's not a strong capability to manage the lock and have the capability to say "I have ownership of this file. No one else can touch it" and then release it, allowing the next one to pick it up. That's a key differentiator that I see between them and Blue Prism. That one feature is lacking. The studio design is a little different. If you go from one tool to the next, you might be a little shocked at how things are organized. I don't see them changing that any time soon. However, the design could be improved upon.

UiPath could work towards more engagement on the community practice side. Some of our people are having a hard time understanding how to make sense of the data that UiPath puts out. There could be some guidance as well on how to calculate ROI. ROI is how much money you have spent and how much you are getting back. But, how can I know how much money I've spent? Do I calculate the cost of infrastructure? Do I calculate the cost of the team I have? Where do I begin? What is the right way to look at ROI? What are some of the analytics I should be looking at? Utilization, the success rate, business value, and ROI have to go hand-in-hand. You cannot tell a whole story with just ROI.

UiPath has done a good job coming up with the broadest use cases. However, I would like to see them dive into more industry-specific use cases. For example, checked OCR and brokerage statements are common. Anything unique to the financial industry would be useful for us.

We are leveraging the UiPath Academy for our citizen developer program. We are asking them to train at their own pace. The courses are straightforward. The adoption rate for this program is low, however. Out of the 150 citizen developers that started, only 10 decided to continue the process. One way to improve the UiPath Academy, I think, would be to add some real-life use cases and take the students through the automation process. These would be good for citizen developers to start with.

The pricing could be more transparent. Overall, I think the pricing is fine, but they keep changing it. It should be more structured. They don't have to tell us what their pricing is, but they should publish how the product is broken down. Also, as a customer, one of my frustration points is that I'm not sure the customer success team is engaged at the right level with the customers. There's too much focus on selling more product versus helping to evolve the COE. There are many partners out there that have kind of learned over the last two years like this is what we need to get it off the ground. There are so many customers out there that I've talked to that have bought UiPath and it's just sitting on the shelf. If they can help them get it off the ground and get it going, then they can increase the community. Another issue that we run into that is not necessarily a reflection of the solution is the fact that our IT operations team does not want us running automations during business hours. This is because they don't have a good understanding of what the true impact of automation is on the source system. It would be great to have UiPath help us educate other members of the organization that automation is no different than human interaction. This could help people like me communicate with stakeholders and increase our ability to run even more automations.

The licensing model is sometimes very confusing and could be simplified for customers. That would help us understand, gauge the offer, and work it into our existing infrastructure.

In terms of payroll processes, HR processes, onboarding, operations, filling in maintenance on equipment, and doing the routine things out in the field will require adoption and interest. You can't get the response that you want until the people in the field decide that they want to change and adopt it. That will be the challenge. Managing the change is huge for us. It's always an obstacle. It's not that, can you automate something, it's more of a question of, internally, will they let you automate something? I'm looking for more of the analytics to make sure that we can properly report on how they're doing. That's what's going to make management invest further into this. I actually come from a reporting background. That's what I focus on in the other financial packages that we have.

Governance has room for improvement but that's more of a cultural thing. It depends on your company. We have the reference architecture that we have in place, but it's easy for someone to say, "Okay, I need to make an adjustment here outside of that reference architecture." Because it's so easy for them to do that, they leave the company now that a non-compliant bot is out there running a production process, we need to be able to rank that in. There needs to be footwork that we have to do as an organization for my team as opposed to a true problem with the platform.

In exception handling, wherever exception occurs, the out arguments are not being passed. It would be good if there is a way to pass the out arguments. Sometimes, when an element is not there, UiPath gets stuck, and it doesn't even throw an exception. It stays stuck for hours until we go and check the logs. When this happens, we have to kill it. It happens in some cases, so an improvement is needed there.

I would like to see more AI-related features added. Improvements could be made to the models so that they are more compatible with data science and machine learning. Better support for databases should be included. For example, interacting with SQL Server and SQL Developer would be beneficial features.

I'm pretty much happy with all of those tools. I don't have anything in mind that I could see improvement. While UiPath Studio helps speed up the cost of digital transformation, in a way, it requires expensive or complex application upgrades or IT support, as it needs an entire setup. That setup requires support from different departments, and that comes with a cost. I came across one problem while upgrading. We were upgrading from the 2019 version to the 2020. There was one thing that was not mentioned either on the website or documentation, and we had to take support from UiPath. The documentation needs to contain each of the scenarios which could occur while upgrading the solutions. As it is now, this is not the case. That said, when we ran into issues, UiPath Support helped us through it.

The AI Center area could definitely improve. The StudioX model could also improve just a little bit so that the introduction of variables is better and would make it possible to pass on a similar kind of data in between multiple activities. This is a very simple concept, however, this kind of feature is not available within UiPath. From the business perspective, a little bit more insight on the dashboard that is currently available in Orchestrator would be ideal. I agree with UiPath having a dedicated tool for insights, however, right now, it's a paid tool. If I can get a little bit more data and a little bit more customization on Orchestrator, that would be really great.

While the solution speeds up the cost of digital transformation, doing so requires expensive or complex application upgrades or IT app support. You will need IT. That said, I haven't had a chance to explore mine in any detail. There need to be more warnings for when there are issues within the automation especially when it comes to exceptions. We're not easily made aware of problems. The sooner we understand what the exception is, the sooner we can adjust things.

The new features or functionalities that come with UiPath upgrades don't work perfectly in the initial days. Their new releases are not stable. We always find some set of issues. I have to work with the UiPath team for a week or so to resolve the issues, and then I'm able to use it. The stabilization should be there. We expect UiPath to reduce the number of errors before rolling out new features to end-users or customers. In addition, many times, the apps or activities that we use within UiPath for designing are no longer compatible when a new upgrade happens or the version is changed. We want UiPath to look into it.

Licensing is one area where UiPath could do better and can be more competitive. It is a little expensive. Their bundling of products is a bit confusing. For instance, if we want the UiPath Apps license, it is bundled with Action Center, so you also have to procure the Action Center license. These bundles are not tailored as per our company's requirements. If we reach out to the UiPath partners who deal with the accounts, they usually take your request into consideration and see what best they can do, but it is still not easily customizable.

The only thing missing is something to track the development cycle. We use third-party tools to do that. That is the only gap in UiPath. Also, scheduling of UiPath robots could be improved. Scheduling is a feature for defining in what sequence, and on what machines, you want your automations to be launched. That area could be improved.

In the future, I would like new services that can utilize robots as a service (RaaS). Our legacy applications are a bit old, so we get issues sometimes in automating those. However, modern applications are very compatible with the UiPath tool. We have seen that UiPath doesn't have the capability to identify unknown pop-ups. This needs improvement. The API needs a lot of improvements because it does not give proper results. There are always some issues with the logs. When it comes to real-time scenarios, we see in production that Citrix automation always crashes. This integration could bring a lot of value to UiPath. Our business could save a lot of time and money if we could automate Citrix effectively. All of our code resides in GitHub, which is our central repository for managing the code. There was a performance issue using GitHub with UiPath; it was slow. They have recently upgraded the performance so we are happy with it now.

Many of the features that UiPath has are good, although better documentation is required for them.