Ping Identity Platform vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."

"This is a user-friendly solution."

"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."

"The solution is stable. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches."

"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."

"PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tools like ForgeRock and Okta, but I find PingFederate to be the most customizable."

"The only feature we were looking for in PingID was SSO integration with our existing web app."

"The solution is highly stable and scalable"

"The most valuable feature is the integration with the Active Directory."

"SAML is the best thing we're using right now because there is no need for creating an external account."

"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."

"Symantec Siteminder Is both scalable and stable."

"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."

"Authentication & Authorization are important because all the sites need authentication for security purposes. That has been handled pretty well all these years with SSO."

"All of our applications get a point, click, and you are in, while we increase security at the same time."

"It is reliable."

"The timing of the token validity, if it could be extended, would be great. I'm not sure if there is even an option to configure these types of settings."

"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."

"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."

"PingID's device management portal should be more easily accessible via a link. They provide no link to the portal like they do for the service. The passwordless functionality could be more comprehensive. You can't filter based on hardware devices. Having that filtering option would be great. Device authentication would be a great feature."

"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."

"Notifications and monitoring are two areas with shortcomings in the solution that need improvement."

"The solution should allow for better integration with other platforms and the UBT."

"PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep."

"I think they need to integrate some of the newer types of authentication into the product. I'm not seeing the innovation when it comes to biometrics in the product."

"We're currently unable to find information about if the solution can do a full implementation with SQL. Some better and more accessible documentation for new users or those curious about the product would be helpful."

"The GUIs are not very clear, especially when integrating with other products from CA."

"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."

"Some of the new protocols, like OAuth 2.0, could be improved."

"All the problems that we reported actually have never been resolved. We could not capture enough information for CA to be able to debug the problem."

"If the reporting feature can be integrated into SSO itself that will be an icing on the cake."

"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."

"PingID pricing is a ten out of ten because it's a little bit cheaper than other tools, such as Okta and ForgeRock, and supports multiple tools."

"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."

"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."

"The product is costly."

"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."

"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."

"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."

"The pricing is reasonable."

"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."

"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."

"The licensing is fair for this solution."

"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."