Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

The solution is primarily used for handling user permission and containing with the Online Exchange. It's for handling user passwords, user permissions, all of the privileges, and for using Azure Active Directory for the Online Exchange.

We're satisfied with the product in general.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the connectivity with our on-premise Active Directory.

We've found the performance to be very good.

The stability is good.

The scalability of the product is decent.

The installation process is straightforward.

The synchronization with the local Active Directory and synchronization with all of the users on the local and cloud could be better. Every user on the cloud and the on-premise local users should have a connection, have the same privilege, the same features. We should be able to change passwords from the local and have it synchronized with the cloud users.

I've used the solution for four years. It's been a while. 

The stability is good. The solution offers good performance. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We've found the scalability of the product to be very good. There aren't any issues with expanding as needed.

In my organization, we have about 25 users. I deployed it for another organization as my company is a service consultant. Therefore, I do this installation for other users and other companies. There are about 60 users in one and another has 100 users. Another company has only 20 users there. The amount of users each organization has varies. 

We do plan to grow our team and possibly use the solution more. 

I have contacted technical support from Microsoft many times, including when the mailing system is down or when I have a problem with Active Directory or Azure. I contact the help desk for Microsoft, and they reply to me in about one hour and help me to solve any issue. It takes about three or four hours and at that point usually, everything is resolved.

The initial setup was very straightforward and simple. It was not overly complex or difficult. We didn't have any problems with the process.

The deployment for the local setup takes some time. For the cloud, it's very straightforward, and it takes no time at all. It takes about two hours to totally install the hybrid, the connection, and go on with the application.

We have about five people who can handle deployment and maintenance duties. That includes me and five engineers.

I can handle the implementation myself. I do not need the help of an integrator or consultant.

We have many customers that purchase licensing agreements with Azure. Typically they are charged per user.

We're a partner.

I would recommend the solution to others. If they just read a bit about it and connect with Microsoft, they'll likely get some good advice as to how to use it. 

I'd rate it at a nine out of ten. 

We use Azure Active Directory to make the computers have policies that we inspect. This allows us to deploy software and block the CMD from the user. Additionally, we deploy the desktop systems with password policies.

Azure Active Directory has helped the organization maintain the user policies of their computer systems.

Azure Active Directory has useful policy assigning and management.

I had some issues with the Azure Active Directory on Windows XP. However, it worked well on Windows 7.

The password policy that we had in place caused some system lockups.

I have used Azure Active Directory within the last 12 months.

The solution is stable.

Azure Active Directory is easy to scale. You can add new employees, by adding their device to the domain assisting.

We have approximately 300 people using this solution in my organization.

My organization plans to continue to use Azure Active Directory.

The technical support has been helpful.

The installation was simple. I did the flash OS installation, created the role of the Active Directory, and deployed the GPO. The full process of implementation takes approximately one hour and setting the Active Directory domain takes approximately 30 minutes.

I did the implementation of Azure Active Directory.

The company I work for has more than 10 branches, we no longer have to go to the branch outside the city to have the application installed on the user's devices. When you have Active Directory, you only need to connect it to the device and then the information will automatically populate. The process was more automated.

The price of the solution's license is good.

I rate Azure Active Directory an eight of ten.

We provide single sign-on, app syncing, and API seamless access to more than 2,000 users with the syncs into Azure. We provide access to email, SharePoint Online, Skype, and other services on the cloud to half of those users. We have services in the cloud, such as app registration and documents for SharePoint Online.

The single sign-on is the most valuable aspect of the solution. It allows for storing passwords in secure vaults. For developers, we use a vault for SSH. Mainly, we have replication from all services on-prem to the cloud.

With a single sign-on, in the case something happens on-premises, users can still use a single sign-on to a PC to access the cloud.

We can deploy policies, which improves our security posture. It's mainly very similar to on-premises, however, some new features can be used on the cloud as well, such as labs and password rotation. Some features have improved, which has been great.

The solution improves the way our organization functions. I can deploy a policy that will search for unused accounts, for example, and delete or just move them to a different organization unit that handles unused accounts. We can change unsecured passwords. We can detect intrusion and inform a security group on how to disable that account immediately. We can also perform security checks on services.

We can easily migrate services and improve the quality and improvement of bandwidth of the service. It's easy to scale.

There are some searches, such as a global search, which have powerful query capabilities if you configure it in a certain way.

It's easy to use. The portal experience provides a dashboard of what's happening. With the dashboard, you can see what's happening with the service faster. Of course, I’m talking about the cloud. On-prem you don't have that dashboard.

Active Directory has affected our end-user experience. It has improved it as we have centralized management now and we have centralized administration, and things can be automated easily. You can have most tasks automated. It's good.

The security needs to be improved. For example, in terms of changing from one version to the latest, meaning going from 2008 to 2012, or 2016 to 2019, you need to get rid of all the operating systems and they need to ensure the security is upgraded and improved.

They need to bring BitLocker into the VMs and the servers.

LAPS could also be improved. LAPS are used to rotate passwords on a server. That can be improved upon to increase security levels.

Protocols SSL 2.0 and SSL 3.0 need to be removed and they should change my TLS 1.2 for every application.

I've been using Azure for about 13 years. However, I've used Active Directory for 25 years. It's been a long time.

We have found some servers do not have enough CPU or memory which meant there was not enough stability. I scaled up the service to ESX, to a virtual host, and I installed multiple DCs, virtualized. As the solution has physical machines, CPU and memory were not enough. However, the scaling provided much more stability.

The scalability is good now, and I find it to be more stable and faster since scaling up to ESX.

We tend to increase usage every month. We have five countries with multiple forests. Currently, we have 200 users or so on the solution.

The technical support is not so bad, however, it's lacking in faster response times sometimes.

We did not previously use a different product.

The initial setup was complex. It has several forests connected to multiple domains in several countries, and it's going through multiple data centers. Typically, we have a solution for the VPN. It's different in every country sometimes. On top of that, centralized services are not so easy to manage in different forests.

The initial deployment was set initially for six months, and then we’ve been doing improvements for the last six months as well. It’s been a year in total.

Our initial implementation strategy was to sync a forest with multiple domains.

We have ten to 15 people who are capable to handle maintenance on the product. These include a cloud architect to Active Directory architect engineers, help desk engineers to deploy and manage solutions, and engineers to manage the servers.

We did not use an integrator, reseller, or consultant for the deployment. We handled it in-house. That is my understanding.

We have seen a bit of an ROI.

The solution is not the cheapest in the market. It could be improved and possibly lowered slightly.

We moved right into Active Directory, however, as a cloud architect, I am familiar with other solutions. I advised the client to go right to Active Directory based on my past experience. Due to the complexity of services they offered, I knew integration would be easy.

We are a Microsoft partner.

We use several versions of the product, including 2016 and 2019. For one customer, they're running 2008, which is the old version, and I just upgraded them to 2012. The domain controller is 2012 R2 and has the latest patches.

I'd advise new users to do an original design with an architect, and think about scaling up while considering services you will be adding in the future. It's important to plan the security tightly and do a neat design and consider services such as BitLocker and other resources that will be needed.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The use cases depend on my clients' specifications. If they have the on-premises Active Directory and it is a hybrid environment, then objects are synchronized with the cloud in Azure Active Directory. Services that are on-premises or in the cloud are synchronized with each other, to create a centralized management solution. 

If we're talking about Azure Active Directory only, the cloud-based, centralized management solution, we don't need to use a VPN to access the resources; everything is cloud. We just need to be connected with Azure Active Directory and we can use the resources anywhere in the world and resource security will be intact.

I use both the cloud and on-premises versions.

Everybody is moving from on-premises to Azure Active Directory because it's cost-effective. They don't need to spend a lot of money on the on-premises resources, such as an on-premises server and maintenance. Now, given that Microsoft has started Windows 365, which is a PC in the cloud, you don't need to have a PC. You can work on an Android tablet from anywhere in the world, using cloud technology.

In terms of the user experience, because the solution is in a cloud environment, people are not bound to work in a specific network. In the old-school way, if you worked from home and you had on-premises Active Directory, you needed to use a VPN. VPNs can be highly unstable because they depend on your home network. If your home network is not good, you won't get the same bandwidth as you would get when using the resources inside the office network. With Active Directory in the cloud, you can use your own network to access the resources. It's faster, reliable, and it's cheaper compared to Active Directory on-premises.

• Conditional Access
• Geofencing
• Azure Multi-Factor Authentication

are the major security features to secure resources.

For example, if I don't want users using the company resources outside of India, I will add managed countries within Conditional Access. Only the people from the managed country will be able to access things. If an employee goes out of India and tries to access the resources that have been restricted, they will not be able to open the portal to access the resources.

We have a lot of freedom in using the Group Policy Objects and, although Group Policy Objects are part of Azure Active Directory, there are still a lot of things that can be improved, such as providing local admin rights to a user. There are various, easy ways that I can do that in the on-premises version, but in the cloud version, it is a bit difficult. You have to create a bunch of policies to make it work.

I have been using Azure Active Directory for six years.

Microsoft works with suppliers and vendors. Certain vendors are very good at providing support and certain vendors are not very good at providing support. It depends on the time zone in which we are opening a ticket and which vendor the ticket is going to.

It's pretty straightforward in general, although it depends on what kind of requirements a client has.

If I'm deploying with Microsoft Autopilot, it usually takes at least 40 to 50 minutes to deploy one machine. If I'm deploying 1,000 machines in one go, you can multiply that 40 minutes for each of those 1,000 machines. Everything is configured in the cloud, in Azure Active Directory. You just need to purchase the machine, configure things, and ship the machine to the user. When they turn it on they will be able to work on it. Everything will be installed in the backend. If it's not on Autopilot, it's just in a matter of a few clicks to connect the machine to Azure Active Directory.

The deployment plan also depends on the client. If the client is not providing machines to their employees, they want the machine to be BYOD, we will work on the existing computer. In that case, we just set up the policies and ask the user to connect to Azure Active Directory. But if a client is concerned about complete security, and they want the machine to be used in a certain way, and they are providing the machine, then I prefer that it should be Autopilot. It becomes an enterprise-managed machine, and we have more control over it.

Clients only invest their money when they know that they are getting a really helpful platform. They want to see that I, as a consultant, am confident in the product I'm asking them to use. I have to be very confident that I am providing them a solution that will definitely work for them.

People have a tendency to keep their information in-house, but the cost of keeping information on-premises in SharePoint servers is very expensive. There is a good chance that, if something happens, they will lose the database. There is no backup. And to keep a backup, you have to pay more for a cloud backup solution to keep your data on another server. You are compromising with your data in a two-sided scenario, where one is on-premises and the other is on a data server as a backup. If you go for the cloud version of Active Directory, everything is secure and everything is in the Microsoft data center, which is reliable and secure. They have disaster management and recovery. That's a win-win situation.

My work is generally on device management, which is on Intune, Endpoint Manager, and Cloud App Security. These all work hand-in-hand. Azure Active Directory is just an assembler of management resources, but Intune makes the device secure. The policies create restrictions. These things work together. If you need Active Directory, you will definitely need Intune.

The largest deployment I worked on with one of my clients was about 2,500 computers. As far as managing them goes, it varies, between 200 to 300 computers at one time in one environment. If I'm working on providing a day-to-day solution, it is different because the queries are different. People usually have problems related to smaller queries, like their printer is not connecting, or they are not able to access SharePoint, or they do not have permissions for a given file. But as far as deployment and designing the architecture of Azure Active Directory goes, I work with midsize companies.

To summarize, the big advantages of this platform are the reliability, cost-effectiveness, and security. These are the features that make it one of the best solutions in the IT industry. Azure AD is the future. Everyone is adopting the cloud environment. I, myself, use Azure Active Directory for my own devices and resources. I encourage other people to accept the future. It gives you more security than the on-premises Active Directory. To me, it is the best solution.

We just use the solution for the authentication and the provision access control, among other tasks.

The access control aspect of the authentication is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The single sign-on is very convenient for us.

It would be ideal if the solution moved to a passwordless type of environment. It's the future of authentification. It's also more secure and convenient.

I've been using the solution for about a year.

The solution is quite stable. I haven't heard any bad things about it. It doesn't crash or freeze. I can't say that I've seen bugs or glitches. It seems to be very reliable so far.

I believe the solution is scalable, although I have not tried to scale it myself personally.

We have many people on the system, including doctors, nurses, practitioners, assistants, etc. It might be around 100 people, give or take.

I've never dealt with technical support for any reason. I wouldn't be able to evaluate their services or discuss their level of responsiveness.

I didn't handle any aspect of the implementation, as I'm not technical in any way. I wouldn't be able to specify if it was complex or straightforward or how the deployment went.

I don't have any insights into the licensing costs. I'm not a part of the accounting or payment process.

Our organizations has a few partnerships with Microsoft.

I don't know which version of the solution we're using. It's most likely the latest, due to the fact that it's a cloud deployment.

The only advice I have for other organizations considering the solution is this: just make sure that you have the right requirements. It's never a carbon copy. Every environment has different needs and requirements.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are a software development company and solution provider, and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

This is an easy way to give users access to applications. I can share access with other organizations outside of our network.

This solution is easy to manage.

The ability to grant access to other organizations is helpful.

It integrates well with a large number of applications.

Microsoft needs to add a single setup, so whenever resources join the company or are leaving the company, all of the changes can be made with a single click.

I would like to see a secure, on-premises gateway that offers connectivity between the physical servers and the cloud. The capability already exists, but it is not secure enough when the setting is marked private.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Active Directory Premium for about a year.

In the time that I have been using Microsoft Azure, I haven't had any problem with stability.

This is the right platform if you are looking for scalability. We have more than 100,000 users.

We have not needed to use technical support. 

We have a couple of contacts in the Microsoft team, so we will reach out to them in case we have any questions.

I have recently been working with Okta, and I find that most organizations are moving toward it. With this in mind, I think that Microsoft has to take care, and consider why so many people are switching. The most important reason is the single setup. Once they set up Okta, it's easy for the organization.

I have been working in Microsoft Azure for a long time and I find the initial setup to be easy.

For maintenance, we have a team of 20 administrators and developers.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis and the cost depends on the number of users. There are no charges in addition to this.

The suitability of this solution depends on the technology and the environment at the organization. Many companies are still transitioning to the cloud, leaving part or all of their data on-premises. Ultimately, it depends on the data that they have and their preference or requirements for keeping it on-premises. In some cases, people want to move only non-private data to the cloud. All of these things have to be considered before implementing Azure Active Directory.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use Azure Active Directory for user credential login, control my users with end-user policies, and apply my conditions.

Active Directory helps me all the time. When users want to log in, it shows me this information with a time and date. It also shows me which computer they are going to use. I can track my users at any time.

I like that you can run it on-premises. I also like that I can use Azure at any time as the main one.

ESAE management, especially the admin tools, could be improved. It should be built in by the vendor, and I shouldn't have to add patches or updates to connect to my domain directly. It should be added by default. The price could be better.

I have been dealing with this product for almost 20 years.

Azure Active Directory is a stable product. 

Azure Active Directory is a scalable product.

Customer service and support are perfect, especially when I'm dealing with my local third-party Microsoft vendor, who always supports me at any time.

Azure Active Directory is expensive.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Azure Active Directory a ten.

The solution is a hybrid cloud with connectors into Azure/Microsoft 365 cloud.

I am still figuring out the whole on-prem/Azure Active Directory Premium/Microsoft 365 integrations and administrative connections.

The scalability of the solution is good.

Technical support can be helpful.

It's not intuitive and we use it mainly for our hybrid capability now and are expanding our footprint in Microsoft 365. The integration between on-prem and Online is interesting. However, the learning curve is high.

When you have an Office 365 enterprise subscription, it comes with Azure Active Directory, however, you don't have an Azure subscription. Yet, all of our active directory connectors put our credentials into the Azure Active Directory. 

There are enough things that aren't implemented on our side and we are in the middle of this transition.  I don't blame the product necessarily for that. However, there are links and items within Microsoft 365 that still point back to the .com side.

Items seem to continue to move, such as security and compliance. Now there's a security portal and a compliance portal, and all three are still being maintained, however, one's being phased in and the others are being phased out. Things continue to change. It's just been a bit to learn. There's a lot to keep track of. There should be a bit more transparency.

The Office 365 subscriptions are a bit confusing with a hybrid environment with what credential has an Microsoft 365 subscription.  However, then some of the documentation I was reading this week was where I ran into a wall. This particular document clearly showed that when you have a particular ability on the Azure side, and then you have another ability on the Office side, intuitively the Microsoft cloud knows to give you certain other rights, to be able to do stuff. This settings and configurations are in different places. Some things are then in the Exchange Online, some things are in the Intune section, etc.

I am not sure if the intent is to have an Microsoft 365 administrator with a second subscription for a cloud admin account or not.  I was trying to do something in Exchange online and received a message that I couldn't do it because I didn't have a mailbox. It's frustrating and confusing at times. There are things like that just are a different user experience between on-prem and online.

The Microsoft Premier Agreement we have has been very beneficial and we have had an excellent experience with a couple of different short cycle projects.

We've been working with the solution for just over a year and I have been involved for the last five months. It's been under a year, and not very long just yet.

The scalability seems to be there.  We are not a very big shop but we have unique needs and requirements.

The premier services we have are very good. We have a contact that's been with Microsoft a while and that's really saved us. The reach back into field engineers and their amazing ability to get the job done have been hugely beneficial.  The Exchange Online engineer we had was worth double what we paid for. It was amazing. If it weren't for that, I am not sure if we would have made our schedule.  Often the timing hasn't lined up, with short notice compliance requirements and implementation constraints due to configuration or version of technology.  They are very responsive, but depending on if it's break fix or planning, the planning side as longer cycles.   

I wasn't a part of the initial setup. I can't speak to how long the deployment took or how easy or difficult the process was.

We had assistance with the setup. We're actually bringing in some more help as our needs have short turn cycles and some ageing infrastructure that we still have to move online.

I would say to make sure you have a trusted integration partner or someone on staff that has been through this transition.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

While we use the on-premises model, we also have it synced for hybrid functionality.

With COVID especially, there have been a lot of changes in a lot of companies and a lot of rethinking of processes lately.

We're in the process of rolling out Office 356 internally. We've had really great feedback that people really like Teams, and we want to move more into that area. We had a roadmap meeting with Microsoft a few months ago. It was probably five months ago, four or five months ago.

Some of the more accessible types of items were on the roadmap for the first quarter of this year. However, Microsoft's working hard at listening to customers, especially through the COVID situation that changed a lot of work and priorities. The collaboration stuff has changed. They've been pushing a little bit more on getting some more integrations. We're not going to have that kind of clout where I am, however, where I used to work, we would have. We were the ones that were making sure the Exchange got upgraded and got to the developers.

I would rate the solution at a six out of ten. If the solution offered better transparency/clarity I might rate it higher.