Kofax RPA vs. SAP Build

As mentioned, the integration between SAP Build Work Zone and SAP BPA, SAP S/4HANA, and Ariba was easy to follow once all requirements were met. However, there is not much information, or at least the SAP Documentation is not easy to follow to set up the right landscape that meets all the requirements; this was the case with the IAS and IPS configuration, where we needed the support of BTP Architects.

Incentivized

• Unattended Automation.
• Attended automation.
• Connecting to the backend SAP system (ECC or S/4).
• Can also talk to non SAP world.
• Doesn't require skills strictly pertaining to BPA. In fact, even a RPA developer can build logic.

Incentivized

• Reusability of components in sap build apps.
• Limited development platform support.
• Desktop agent not available for MAC OS.
• Offline mode.
• Accessibility feature.

Incentivized

The interface is very modern, web-based, no deep technical knowledge is required to use SAP Build Process Automation. It works with drag and drop, configuration and almost no coding is needed. Actually, we had to write code only for one specific small business logic. All the rest could be done in a no-code manner.

Incentivized

There are, for example, great blog writings about automation cases and examples. The studio version is updated often. There are also useful OpenSAP online courses.

Incentivized

Bubble.io is more user-friendly in comparison with SAP AppGyver. The latter being practically a free tool provides enough functionality to achieve results though while Bubble.io doesn't let you export your projects without a paid subscription. Bubble.io has great initial tour and tutorial integrated into the platform that can be handy for any new beginner while SAP AppGyver can be a little overwhelming.

Incentivized

• Lower costs for development and automation
• Very easy to use
• Integrates existing applications with pre-built APIs, components, and templates for SAP and non-SAP applications

Incentivized