Curious why you think UI Path is better for specific workflow automation vs palantir? Any proof points? Why wouldn’t a frontier lab be able to do this ?
I don't have any proof point, this is just a personal interpretation from following Palantir for years now. The way they approach pain point is by learning everything about a company and use generic tools from there. The added value comes from AIP and its intensive knowledge.
UIPath doesn't need that. It needs to be built around a specific process and starts from the process, not from global knowledge, which allows much more precise steps. This builds detailed workflows for small actions.
If you want to compare maestro to AIP at a company's level (meaning very large workflows covering many data points and actions), sure AIP will be a better tool.
But that won't be true for small workflows as AIP will be overkill there. Too much to automate a simple workflow. Doesn't mean it isn't possible, just not the objective of AIP. It is meant for complete knowledge of complex environments.
Hey thanks that is helpful. Obviously need to do my own DD a little to understand the product but this is a good launching point. So my understanding is UI builds a product for a specific workflow that can be applied horizontally?
Is this not kinda an obvious move by the frontier labs as well?
Feel likes it’s a little more specific than I am assuming since it seems I’m missing something…
I’ll try to go through expert interview library in week ahead to pick up proof points. I added a tracker tho!
That's what RPAs do but UIPath added an intelligent layer with AI onto it meaning those RPAs are now able to understand context and modify their behaviour based on it. So instead of blindly following a sequence of action and stop if something unexpected happens, they are now able to think and adapt and complete the task. Which also allows much more complex actions.
Curious why you think UI Path is better for specific workflow automation vs palantir? Any proof points? Why wouldn’t a frontier lab be able to do this ?
I don't have any proof point, this is just a personal interpretation from following Palantir for years now. The way they approach pain point is by learning everything about a company and use generic tools from there. The added value comes from AIP and its intensive knowledge.
UIPath doesn't need that. It needs to be built around a specific process and starts from the process, not from global knowledge, which allows much more precise steps. This builds detailed workflows for small actions.
If you want to compare maestro to AIP at a company's level (meaning very large workflows covering many data points and actions), sure AIP will be a better tool.
But that won't be true for small workflows as AIP will be overkill there. Too much to automate a simple workflow. Doesn't mean it isn't possible, just not the objective of AIP. It is meant for complete knowledge of complex environments.
Hey thanks that is helpful. Obviously need to do my own DD a little to understand the product but this is a good launching point. So my understanding is UI builds a product for a specific workflow that can be applied horizontally?
Is this not kinda an obvious move by the frontier labs as well?
Feel likes it’s a little more specific than I am assuming since it seems I’m missing something…
I’ll try to go through expert interview library in week ahead to pick up proof points. I added a tracker tho!
Thanks for the effort
That's what RPAs do but UIPath added an intelligent layer with AI onto it meaning those RPAs are now able to understand context and modify their behaviour based on it. So instead of blindly following a sequence of action and stop if something unexpected happens, they are now able to think and adapt and complete the task. Which also allows much more complex actions.