What needs improvement with UiPath?

At the moment, I cannot think of anything that could improve UiPath Platform.

In my opinion, one area where UiPath Platform can be improved is the Orchestrator's latency, which occurs sometimes while we're in the cloud. We experience a lot of latency issues, especially with almost 100 automations generating substantial data, causing significant latency that we should aim to improve. To make it a ten, I believe improvements in the Orchestrator and finding a better way to optimize agent costs, perhaps using a RAG model or a wrapper, would benefit both UiPath Platform and consumers.

I believe UiPath Platform could be improved price-wise, as I believe the Test Cloud version currently prices based on the number of transactions. If you have one hundred test case scenarios and execute them just ten times a year, it totals one thousand executions based on that pricing model, which is very good. Additionally, if they could extend the cloud capabilities of Agentic AI further, it would be beneficial since on-premise customers may have to spend more on servers. If everything could be put in the cloud, they could save on that. My thoughts on UiPath Platform's user community are that it can definitely improve. In my twenty-five years of experience, including on the influential council for SAP and Salesforce, I have observed that other user communities are more broadly covered with greater engagement. While UiPath Platform's community is really good, I see room for improvement in forming user groups, possibly region-based or something similar.

UiPath Platform can be improved by using AI agents to suggest code, which is already a significant step forward, and by expanding plug-and-play integrations.

From an alliance partner standpoint, UiPath Platform can be improved regarding vendors being resellers on the licensing. There is a gap between vendors that are a lower partner tier and those that are a higher partner tier such as platinum or diamond, where they have the ability to resell licensing directly with UiPath. However, the lower tier partners are penalized and have to go through Ingram, which causes a problem on the client side. The client might want to work with a different vendor partner, but they may not be able to because of the pricing, causing frustration and confusion. The client is not able to work with the partner that they want to work with and is forced to work with a different partner that sells direct and can give them a lower cost.

UiPath Platform could be improved by having more documentation on what all applications can be utilized in an easier way.

I think there are some elements of UiPath Platform that could be more user-friendly, particularly in terms of licenses, configurations, and sometimes the project settings, which are not as user-friendly as they could be.

Some pain points I have faced with UiPath Platform include difficulties with certain automation activities. For instance, sometimes a click activity selector works on my local machine but fails in RDS, which presented challenges that required finding alternative solutions. When extracting data not in a table format, I encountered issues. However, I learned at a conference about recording activities that can create automation, which I hope to incorporate to potentially double my output to six use cases per year, enhancing business relevance.

UiPath Platform can be improved because there are so many updates coming all the time, and it is very hard to keep up, but I understand that this is mostly an industry issue at this point; I would say just try to group what is more important updates together and highlight those, and probably defer the small ones for a later release. At this point, I do not have anything else to add about the needed improvements because UiPath does a very good job in terms of documentation and support.

UiPath Platform can be improved by being clearer on the pricing setups and the scalability of the solutions. Beyond that, they have a very solid product.

So far, I see general areas where UiPath Platform excels, but I believe improvements could be made especially regarding IXP and the ability to integrate your own models securely.

I don't have any concerns about how UiPath Platform could be improved at the moment.

I do not currently have an answer on how UiPath Platform can be improved. At the moment, I do not feel there is anything that could be better or any small improvements I would like to see in UiPath Platform.

In my opinion, UiPath Platform could be improved by adding the ability to create our own agents. That would probably be very helpful for us too.

UiPath Platform can be improved by getting into the fine details of some of the different steps inside of Studio. For example, I have one where I am trying to use a shared email inbox to extract attachments. You can extract attachments from your main inbox but not from a shared inbox, and we are currently unable to get that working. For some reason, you can use the shared inbox for everything else except for that activity, and that is the one that we need.

Additional features that should be included in the next release may involve having a dashboard feature to get some insights. I am not sure if there is one, and in fact now that I am saying it, I feel there might be, but I just have not been introduced to it. If there is not one, then I would say that would be very helpful. Insights are always helpful, especially when you have to take that to senior leadership; something easier to explain to them would be those types of dashboards. UiPath Platform can be improved in other ways as well.

I would recommend taking into account every small piece of information because in the AI era, there are a lot of new information introduced here and there. If we have the proper channel with the right medium, we have the proper channel for sure, but library-wise, if we have the necessary information and things properly aligned and not a too big video recording, if it is shorter and more concise, then that will help more audience to explore the product.

I believe UiPath could improve by addressing the need for so many Agentic AI applications and solutions available in the market. UiPath needs to take RPA to the next level and truly become a business orchestrator that works across multiple agents, wherever they are located. That is what I am hoping UiPath could become. What would make this a perfect ten for me includes bringing UiPath forward in the AI age and truly becoming the layer on top of agents.

UiPath Platform can be improved if they have good connectivity with other systems within their platform. If they can provide us complete end-to-end visibility across multiple systems and offer one single view from all other platforms, that will help.

I think UiPath Platform can be improved as it is taking steps towards improving anything that could be improved. Historically, new products have come out half-baked and it takes a while to vest until they are actually usable and production ready compared to when they first launch. Apart from that, I think customer feedback would be really helpful to truly take into account, and as a developer, it is about the individuals who are actually using it and building it out as a whole.

In my opinion, UiPath Platform can be improved with greater stability, as the versions are rapidly changing, sometimes with minor differences and sometimes major; a more consistent interface between versions would be beneficial. The only thing I can think that would make it a solid 10 is some additional features and samples around new options so we can get hands-on experience before fully implementing, as that appears to be the only thing it seems to be missing.

We are starting to use UiPath Platform's agentic automation capabilities. We do have a conversational agent in a proof-of-concept phase, but nothing production-facing yet. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate UiPath Platform overall as a nine. We are huge fans. I would recommend that organizations considering UiPath Platform start with a small proof-of-concept. Find that one use case that has a clear return on investment and is highly manual, and be able to use the full breadth of UiPath Platform. If you have a use case for invoice processing or Document Understanding, I think that is where I would start because that is where the platform is heading with newer capabilities. Start with that first use case and continue expanding from there.

Currently, I think UiPath Platform can be most improved by maturing in terms of its workflows, such as having better integration with our different tools. Right now, I would love it if more things could come to a desktop app rather than having it be on the Orchestrator side.

Enhancements in UiPath Platform are necessary, particularly concerning Document Understanding. If any model version changes occur in the studio, it mandates data type updates at every point in the workflow, which is cumbersome after production deployment. This becomes particularly challenging when companies lack access to production, so we have raised this issue with UiPath for a potential solution. The features related to agents in UiPath Platform must be improved. Although we have agents, they need better capabilities to understand prompts without requiring precise instructions, akin to chatbot interactions. If the agent fails to grasp a prompt, it should proactively engage with the user for clarification, increasing usability for non-expert users. My experience with UiPath Platform's accuracy and reliability reveals that it lacks consistent accuracy, especially in financial contexts. While modification of prompts can help, areas involving money always need human validation. Additionally, a confidence score, as seen in Document Understanding, is currently absent for agents, creating a reliance on manual approval processes that is less desirable.

I believe UiPath Platform can be improved regarding the complexity of using the AI units. It would be beneficial to have a free trial and proper documentation to understand their use. Additionally, UiPath Academy videos need improvement in clarity and explanation, as they are currently too fast-paced and high-level, making it difficult for new learners to follow.

In my current process with UiPath Platform, I experienced an issue with a SharePoint activity and raised a ticket with the UiPath support team. The initiative was good—they came with a call and all—but the issue did not resolve even after two to three months. The support team may need to improve response times and resolution effectiveness. In documentation, providing examples along with how the activity works would be more helpful.

When we compare UiPath Platform to some other automation tools in the market that are emerging, UiPath Platform has a steep learning curve to get started with. UiPath Platform is a heavy application altogether and is not easy to deploy. Because it offers so many features that are packaged really well, some competitors are attracting users. Any10, for example, is a lightweight application, and many people have started to use Any10 instead of UiPath Platform because of the learning curve. UiPath Platform relied heavily on robots before the arrival of agents. Robots usually tend to fail because UiPath Platform relies heavily on UI automation, and UIs tend to break down. However, they are now moving towards API automation, which is good.

One area for improvement in UiPath Platform is the steep learning curve for new users compared to those who have been using it for a while.

UiPath Platform can be improved in several ways. At Allianz, we have raised multiple TAF requirements, asking for integrations such as AAD for Document Understanding and better utilization of platform unit resources, which currently lack visibility. Regarding needed improvements, I wish UiPath would prioritize finishing the TAF requests we have raised and ensuring compatibility across all products, especially since the recently introduced Coded Apps currently do not work on the private link. Regarding UiPath Platform's AI capabilities, I believe its governance and security need improvement. While I see recent enhancements such as the ability to disable individual models and track them, I still find room for improvement in governance, which I would rate an eight out of ten. One improvement needed for UiPath Platform is the capability to run from customer environments. If UiPath could develop an environment that can be deployed in customer subscriptions, it would alleviate security concerns regarding data transfer.

As a platform engineer, I've worked extensively across the UiPath Platform and identified several limitations, which I've logged as tickets—UiPath has confirmed these will be addressed in upcoming releases. The new dashboard feature is a welcome addition, though the validation and accuracy of the data it presents still need improvement and further review. On the upgrade and version management front, while the process has improved over the years, coordinating version compatibility across Orchestrator, Studio, and robot components—especially in hybrid or on-premises environments—still requires careful planning. From a licensing and cost transparency perspective, I've seen the shift toward the Platform Units model, but I haven't found clear visibility into how Platform Unit consumption is tracked at the organization level. For example, if a tenant hasn't been allocated any Platform Units and an end user in that tenant tries to use one, it gets consumed directly from the organization-level pool. That kind of consumption visibility is what I've been looking for but haven't been able to find.

In terms of improvements, I believe monitoring and governance are key areas that need further enhancement. The utilisation of licenses and platform units should be more transparent and easier to monitor at the tenant level. Currently, there are challenges in obtaining clear visibility into license consumption and platform unit utilisation across all tenants. Improved monitoring and reporting capabilities in this area would help administrators manage resources more effectively. Another area for improvement is version management. More flexible version control, including enhanced support for semantic versioning, would be beneficial. This would allow users to clearly differentiate between major releases, minor releases, and incremental updates. Features such as version comparison, release tracking, and simplified rollback options would improve overall application lifecycle management. Additionally, debugging and troubleshooting capabilities could be further enhanced. Root cause analysis can often be time-consuming, requiring extensive log analysis and investigation. More detailed diagnostics, real-time monitoring insights, and improved logging capabilities would help identify and resolve issues more quickly. Performance optimisation for large-scale automations is another important area. Faster execution times, improved scalability, and simplified maintenance for complex automation workflows would provide significant value to both developers and business teams. Further improvements in AI-powered Document Understanding would also be beneficial. Enhancing extraction accuracy for complex and semi-structured documents, while simplifying model training and maintenance, would improve automation outcomes and reduce operational effort. In addition, providing more out-of-the-box dashboards, analytics, and ROI reporting capabilities would help organizations better measure automation adoption, platform utilisation, and business value. Enhanced reporting capabilities would make it easier to demonstrate the impact of automation initiatives to stakeholders. Overall, the main areas where I see opportunities for improvement are: * Enhanced version management and application lifecycle control. * Better debugging, diagnostics, and monitoring capabilities. * Greater UI customisation options for UiPath Apps. * Improved performance and scalability for large automation solutions. * Enhanced AI accuracy and simplified model training. * More comprehensive analytics, reporting, and automation ROI dashboards. These enhancements would make development, support, governance, and platform administration more efficient. Among them, improved debugging, monitoring, and operational visibility would likely have the most significant impact on day-to-day support activities and overall user experience.

To assist freshers or new users starting with UiPath Platform, having better documentation or structured learning platforms would be beneficial. UiPath Platform is strong but can feel complex, especially for new users, due to numerous products, features, and configuration options. A simpler, guided experience would ease the onboarding process. Moreover, implementing AI and automation often requires considerable configuration and testing, so more built-in templates and best practice examples for common business scenarios would accelerate implementation. Overall, the focus should be on simplifying UiPath Platform and enhancing its transparency and integration capabilities for enterprise-level automation.

Regarding improvements, recently launched features continue to improve. Unique and ready-made license costs should be addressed. UiPath Platform should work on the licensing information. On the product side, I feel there is no need to improve since there are too many features. Even with AI, the accuracy is not one hundred percent accurate. We can estimate around eighty to eighty-five percent accuracy. Regarding UiPath Platform's AI capabilities, governance can be set, and coming to the security standpoint, it is quite lagging, but UiPath Platform is providing improvements. I believe they should work on licensing because most customers will be concerned about the licensing.

Sometimes, we encounter system errors that could be resolved via support, but connection issues are more frequent in enterprise applications. However, these can usually be solved by raising tickets if you are part of an enterprise, though we are not, which makes it somewhat challenging. It is vital to ensure the connections of UiPath Platform are maintained because it has a larger community. If UiPath Platform website included more features and documentation accessible easily, it would greatly enhance the experience. Instead of continually needing to raise support tickets, having a documentation hub where details can just be entered to retrieve required documents would be extremely beneficial.

UiPath Platform is already quite comprehensive, but if I have to name a few areas that it can be improved, the first thing I would say is licensing. Licensing and pricing could be less complex, more affordable and more transparent, especially for the organizations who are just starting up or trying to scale. Another area that can be improved is that some advanced features have a steeper learning curve, making them more intuitive would help developers and business users. Finally, I would like to also say tighter integration between RPA, AI and agentic process, so it is easier to build intelligent end-to-end processes without having to connect multiple components manually. One area that I would like to emphasize about the needed improvements is overall platform simplicity. UiPath Platform has a lot of capabilities, and it is something great that we all would like to stick to UiPath Platform, but sometimes finding the right feature or understanding how different components fit in together can take time. I would like to see better troubleshooting and debugging guidelines. In cases where automations fail because of integrations or environment-related issues, better guidance and better indication will be helpful. As agentic automations are becoming more important day by day, making these capabilities easier makes it easier to adopt and manage at enterprise scale that would make the platform even stronger.

UiPath Platform can be improved by better handling of updates. Whenever there is something new, they keep forcing customers to upgrade. They should bring a feature that allows auto-translation for future updates to avoid the pain of upgrading every time they release a new package, as they remove some old features. This has to be addressed as it makes it difficult for users to keep up as new versions are approved. The pain points include necessary updates to support documents or documentation. It would be helpful to provide real-time examples for a feature, usage, and configuration. While this is getting updated on UiPath Platform Academy, support documents updated with the latest information will be highly beneficial. Redoing updates and manually updating the code for the latest features is necessary only because of these issues. Apart from that, everything looks good.

The challenges I have faced with UiPath Platform include the need to familiarize myself with new technologies as they are introduced, often requiring exploration or engagement with recorded videos or documentation.

I am overall very satisfied with UiPath Platform but believe there are areas for improvement, such as the licensing model being potentially expensive for smaller organizations and startups, as well as the desire for more built-in AI templates and reusable components for faster intelligent automations. While I find the overall user experience very good, I would appreciate tighter integration with more third-party enterprise applications and cloud services, and having faster responses for complex technical issues would be beneficial while enhancing the debugging experience for greater productivity.

I really do not see any necessary improvements for UiPath Platform as everything is in place and it is a very good product. I would suggest that if the consumption of AI units can get reduced or if I can use community additions, that would be one thing to consider; otherwise, everything looks top-notch. All is good and there are no further improvements needed for UiPath Platform.

I think there is room for improvement in UiPath Platform, especially to do more with the various integrations. They could improve from a cost perspective because ideally, the customers that we are positioning to UiPath Platform are really big enterprise customers who can afford it. From a cost perspective, not really from a feature perspective, I see customers shying away and trying other automation tools, including tools like Cloud. I would like to see more integrations in the future, especially on the cybersecurity part, with more integrations into database and database activity monitoring tools.

UiPath Platform could focus more on including legacy applications. Currently, SAP, Workday, and a few other applications are legacy systems that they support, but they could work more on Workday and add more features for it. Right now, I would rate UiPath Platform at nine out of ten. If they add more features for Workday, since we now have a lot of customers using Workday, it would be helpful for us to propose UiPath Platform to Workday users. With additional Workday features, I could give them a perfect ten out of ten.

I am not using communication mining or UiPath Insights, but I am well aware of those concepts. I have not yet used coding agents to build or troubleshoot automations with UiPath Platform as it is a new feature. I find that the pricing for UiPath Platform is relatively high compared to Automation Anywhere and other tools, but I do not know the exact numbers. For UiPath Platform, I would like to see improvements in UI approaches, particularly with fuzzy selectors and enhanced image recognition capabilities.

I have noticed some drawbacks and downsides that require improvement not just in UiPath Platform but in all RPA tools. Recently, all RPA tools were reduced in the market due to some GenAI or other tools. After that, UiPath included multiple features, Agentic, Maestro, and GenAI capabilities. Each and everything is now available in UiPath Platform, including creating agents and calling LLMs. This is the good part in UiPath Platform. I see the market, and UiPath Platform is growing, and we already saw some improvements in UiPath Platform. Regarding improvements, I am not completely sure, but I know that in UiPath Platform, IXP is available. It relates to an upgraded version of Document Understanding. Through IXP, we can automate processes related to communication and capturing information from chats and everywhere. I am not entirely sure if we need to purchase an additional license for this, but that is my understanding.

I see weaknesses in UiPath Platform, particularly the model of licensing, as the enterprise level is currently at $40,000,000, which is not feasible for all client segments, especially since the majority want to start small and then adopt the tool step-by-step, but are obliged to pay $40,000 just to access the platform without robots. To make UiPath Platform better, it would be beneficial to integrate more models, allowing the possibility to create my own models in terms of Agentic and AI, which is very important. Additionally, while we do have a governance layer in orchestration, it is not very mature at the moment.

The improvements I believe could be made to UiPath Platform depend on which area they are trying to focus on. Is it about developing stronger relationships with large organizations and large firms where the initial connection takes considerable time, API configuration, and system setup with a learning curve? If that is the target area, I believe UiPath Platform needs to make the product easier to understand and improve the integration with current existing models and versions of models being run. For example, which data flows or data types are being used, what version of Python and PHP is currently being utilized, and whether it is compatible across all flows. On that aspect, they can improve. Separately, although I do not believe that is the intent, if the intent is to be highly generic, something similar to Zapier or a Y Combinator-based approach to the market, I would say they need to bring changes to their pricing strategy. Currently, the pricing is very aggressive, and it makes sense only if you are operating above 10,000 to 100,000 leads per day. For us, it was worthwhile at that volume. Unless we are processing that kind of information, the subscription would not make sense. Perhaps the pricing could be relaxed somewhat for smaller organizations. The additional features I believe they could implement in the future to make the platform more complete involve addressing the primary use case for which we adopted it. They were on par with, and probably the best in the market to serve us. Although there might be small nuances in how we are implementing things, for example, we have recently implemented a chatbot. That essentially multiplies every single flow into the number of chat sessions and how it can flow forward. Those implementations were tough to handle in UiPath Platform. You would have to start from the beginning and build everything up slowly, developing logics. More AI integration could occur where their systems can make a pre-assessment of how the systems can look, and then an engineer can do a validation instead of building everything from the start. That is one aspect of potential improvement.

I use the Agentic automation capabilities, such as the agent builder, orchestration, testing, and autopilot. My experience has been positive, and I have identified areas in UiPath Platform that have room for improvement. There are multiple upgrades coming in, and every 45 to 60 days or two months, new releases arrive. With rapid changes in technology coming every two months or quarter, the previous updates from earlier releases become immediately deprecated because something new enters the market and completely overshadows the previous upgrade. That is one thing I have noticed. Beyond that, room for improvements is mainly focused on agents. Anything around agent building frameworks or improvements on how things can be done using agents, how context grounding is done, or how connections to third-party tools and integrations can be made are currently straightforward and available, but improvements could be explored on a broader extent where augmented general intelligence can be implemented. I would like to know how UiPath Platform compares with other automation tools and what else I have tried, such as Automation Anywhere or Blue Prism.

I would appreciate the opportunity to share additional thoughts about needed improvements for UiPath Platform that could make it even better for users like me.

In terms of areas for improvement, artificial intelligence has the potential to be better, also the sentiment part, and on-premise hosting for specific regulated customer entities is one more improvement.Direct UiPath Platform support needs some improvement, as I have to follow the entire process of ticket creation before getting a response with the SLAs defined by UiPath Platform, causing a little long waiting time to handle all technical support and provide resolution.

UiPath Platform could be improved security-wise by adding easy variables or integrations with scripting, enabling easier integration with other tools or websites with just one or two actions. Security improvements are needed in the credential managers or security managers of UiPath Platform, allowing me to securely store emails, customer details, or credentials of websites or tools, ideally with encryption.

One thing that UiPath Platform can definitely improve is they are currently making a ton of changes in their core products, such as Orchestrator and specifically in Studio. These changes are good to a point. Something which is working really well should not basically have a ton of changes in terms of changing the entire UI and changing the options. When the developer performs an upgrade, it is hectic. I now have to go through this entire new thing. I have to learn all of it. Things are still the same, but everything is moved. The way that we identify elements and the way that we deal with the identification of selectors and everything also keeps on changing with every upgrade. That is kind of a negative for me because I know how to handle a couple of things when it comes to Studio and those are working very well for me. When it comes to business users, it is even less for them. They do not know much, and when they learn and the UI changes, they are discouraged. They think they have to learn something new. UiPath Platform should focus on improving their product, but making too many changes too quickly in UI, even from one version to another, I think that is not a very good idea. However, it is not a very difficult thing to learn. After maybe a couple of days or maybe after a week, you get used to it. We do notice slowness as well. That is one of the things. The biggest challenge that we face when dealing with UiPath Platform is the concept of unknowns or basically how different processes are connected to each other. They have tried to handle it to a certain level with the help of Automation Hub, but still the interconnected processes, like how one process is dependent upon another, that is not available. A best way to think about it is how a graph essentially works, with how one point is connected to another. I would really appreciate UiPath Platform to develop something, whether it is with the help of AI or a simple tool that they can develop, that can allow me as a business owner to put in all of my processes in there and see how one of my APIs is being utilized by four different processes. If this goes down, four of my automated processes are impacted. That functionality I would really love to see. They can move insights forward, I think. They can start focusing on it.

I think they are turning too much into a business standpoint with UiPath Platform, meaning that the new stuff that they have been developing and operating has the most focus on business, so business can actually develop it within UiPath Platform, which they kind of never will. They have been disregarding the developer side of things by not keeping it simple and easy to use. I think they have been developing too much into the idea that anyone can build in UiPath Platform, but it's making things harder for people who actually understand UiPath Platform and how it should run. It's not about being too simplistic; it's about making things that for us don't make sense. Some changes even in the Excel activities have been making things harder and pointless in some regard. I think UiPath Platform should focus more on developers and not on business because, in reality, business will never be doing automations. If they do, they will always need a developer to fix it because they messed up somewhere, and for the price, it went up too high.

Backward compatibility has room for improvement because it often happens that when someone starts developing on one version of UiPath Platform, for example, version 2023.4, and newer versions come out, they might not have a proper SDLC which covers keeping up-to-date on UiPath Platform. When deciding to update to the newest version, it is often the case that it breaks previously developed automations and code. Even ninety percent of your code might not work due to new activities, packages, or something else. The first improvement should be on backward compatibility, which means I want to easily update when I need to. I have also faced an issue with Q items and API. It does not allow full manipulation of Q items as you can do natively. For instance, there are several stages of transaction status, and with the API, you can grab and read details about items but cannot set the status in progress, which is essential for UiPath Platform to advance to the next transaction stages. This is covered by native activities of UiPath Platform, but when I want to leverage it from the API, I cannot do so. The second point is the lack of proper documentation for coded automation workflows. I noticed that not many people use the coded workflows feature, which is great for creating C# classes for helpers and other custom needs. However, the lack of documentation and answers in the UiPath Platform forum can be frustrating. I would suggest more rich documentation and an open-source behavior approach for this feature to provide information for developers.

In UiPath Platform, the area that may have room for improvement is the language, which is quite difficult. From the SQL perspective, it feels more manageable to handle or write, but the language needed to create some KPIs in UiPath Platform is quite challenging. I have compared UiPath Platform with other automation tools such as Power Automate and Celonis, and while they were quite similar, I still have concerns about the programming language only.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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 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 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.

* 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.