Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

The active directory on Microsoft Azure is similar to the corresponding system for an on-premise active directory.

I have no issues with Azure Active Directory.

Our users and clients are migrating from on-premises solutions to cloud-based solutions. As a result, they do not require on-premise service. 

What I like is that I can go anywhere, at any time, and to any client premise, and I can simply log in to the admin panel and can serve any of my clients.

Instead of using Team Viewer, you connect to their local service, which is centralized. I have got the Microsoft exchange, and have access to Microsoft Azure. I can check the workstations, and perhaps soon I will be using Microsoft Intune and the Microsoft Defender enterprise. Even if I am not on the premises, I will be able to check and secure my workstations.

I don't have any major problems. I don't use it in a way that requires a lot of resources.

The main issue is that because Active Directory is in the cloud, it will inevitably be dependent on internet connectivity.

It would be beneficial if Microsoft could make it lighter so that it requires fewer resources.

Better pricing will help us market it more than having it on-premises.

Azure Active Directory was implemented one year ago.

For the time being it has been stable. I have a small number of clients, and no hybrid system. We chose those clients with a maximum of twenty users. We don't want large clients so that we can implement one system in one location, and roll it out the same way to all of the clients.

In total, I have 10 clients, five of those are now users of Azure Active Directory.

By the end of the year, we hope to have all of our clients using Microsoft Azure.

New clients are immediately placed on Microsoft Azure.

The Microsoft team in Mauritius has been extremely helpful in implementing systems and resolving issues. We have small clients who have not been faced with many issues.

We deploy the M365 business premium services and a couple of months ago we started to implement 365 Defender. It is a cloud-based solution.

We're new to it. For the time being, we are only using the antivirus component. We haven't used Intune yet. We are not using the entire package. We are only now going to put such solutions into action.

Microsoft Azure was implemented a year ago, and is only used for the creation of users and emails, group emails, and shared boxes, but my clients are mostly lawyers. So, the primary uses are online email exchange and word processing.

We are trying to implement Microsoft Azure more and more.

Azure is the central point. Microsoft Azure is replacing my on-premises service.

The installation is rather straightforward.

We had some assistance from the local Microsoft team.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.

When I calculated the price, it appeared to be nearly the same as the on-premise server. 

Better pricing would attract customers to use the cloud.

We haven't had to deal with any major recovery issues.

We have had Excel and Word files that were simply recoverable. We backup the server, but nothing more serious than that.

We are Microsoft centric solution providers.

We have very small clients, companies with 20 to 30 users of Excel, Word, and the internet. We deploy Microsoft 365 platforms, not much in the way of large software applications.

I would recommend this solution to others, and I am already promoting it. 

I am suggesting that all of my clients migrate from on-premise active directory to a Microsoft view because, with the current COVID, many of our users work from home. I just wanted to point out that almost all of our users work from home. They are currently working on the roaster. Half of the company works from home, while the other half works on-site. Having active and SharePoint, is really assisting them in working from home.

I would rate Azure Active Directory a nine out of ten.

We are using it for authentication. We are using GPOs for user and computer policies.

The central authentication server is most valuable. GPOs are useful for user and computer policies.

Its price should be improved. It is very expensive for Turkish people.

We have been using Azure Active Directory for about six months. This is a new company, and we started to use new IT solutions. We bought a lot of IT solutions, equipment, and tools. 

It is stable. 

At the end of the project, about 1,200 people will use this solution. We don't have any plans to increase its usage.

We didn't use Microsoft's support. We have mostly Turkish or local solution partners for any help. 

I didn't use any other solution.

It was not easy. It was also not difficult. It took about a month.

We used a solution partner for its deployment. For maintenance, we would have about 10 engineers for 1,200 people.

It is very expensive. Its price should be lower. Price is the most important factor for Turkish people. 

This is the best solution for authorization. I would rate it a nine out of 10.

I am a cloud engineer, and I do a lot of administrative work that involves creating new infrastructure for our applications. Whenever I create infrastructure, I have to install it on our Active Directory and then set it up. This is how it was that I started working with Azure Active Directory.

Once the infrastructure is set up, I usually proceed to create user groups and user IDs inside Active Directory. After they are created, I set up and configure them based on the requirements of the organization, including the access required for different groups and users.

We deal with a lot of health information that we have to keep confidential, so having the Azure cloud security policies in place, such that nothing is exposed to the outside world, is helpful for us.

The security and infrastructure management features are the most valuable ones for us.

It offers multifactor authentication for setting up development pipelines.

Better deployment management and visibility functionality would be helpful. There is a lot of room for improvement in our infrastructure, and in particular, when we create something, we have to visit a lot of websites. This makes life more difficult for us.

When we deploy new infrastructure, it begins with a lengthy approval process. For example, as an administrator, I may receive an infrastructure request from one of our developers. The developer might need access to our front-end, where all of the servers are deployed. The problem is that we don't know exactly what has been deployed within our servers, so better visibility would be helpful.

It's a closed infrastructure, and every developer gets an individualized container. We don't know exactly which features have been provided to them and it's a roundabout process to log back into Active Directory and see exactly what permissions have been assigned. It requires returning to a specific feature and looking at the specific user.

I have been working with Azure Active Directory for just over three and a half years.

This is a highly reliable solution and we plan to continue using it.

Right now, we have 5,000 users that are deployed on Azure Active Directory. Every internal user account that's been created has some sort of multifactor authentication attached to it.

Right now, there isn't a plan to increase our usage. I think we have reached our maximum capacity and if we have to add on something else, then we have to use another tenant or figure out a different way to do it.

We have a team of 15 people who deal with tickets related to this solution.

We constantly have the chance to engage with Microsoft regarding Azure Active Directory. They provide full-time support, so for any issues that we face, we just create a ticket. When we have issues, we quickly get someone from the Azure support team to help us out.

Prior to using Azure Active Directory, we had our own Active Directory. Once we started migrating our applications to Azure, we began moving away from our traditional implementation.

The initial deployment process takes a couple of days for us, although exactly how long depends upon the type of deployment. If you have new deployments then I suggest creating an automated script that will kick it off because this will save time. If on the other hand, there is something that is already deployed and it needs to be redeployed, it doesn't take longer than a couple of hours.

It only takes one person to deploy. It is done on a ticket basis, as requested by people like our developers.

This product provides added value to the company.

In summary, this is a good product and it has been helpful for us, but without doing the proper research, I wouldn't recommend starting with Azure Active Directory. Migrating all of your user accounts and then your resources from different domains to an Azure Active Directory is a huge task. It means that you have set up to create everything from scratch, so without doing proper research, you may run into problems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are using the solution primarily for demo purposes. We use active data cases from Microsoft. You can run different kinds of virtual machines and different kinds of services. We're currently using it in production.

It's very smooth and very easy to use. 

The performance is good. 

The product is stable.

It's quite scalable.

The initial setup is not complex.

We would like to see more system updates. They should happen more frequently.

I've used the solution for a while. 

The stability has been good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution can scale if you need it to.

About350 people use the solution in our organization.

Their support is not great when you are using cloud solutions, however, when you are using cloud solutions, it's very smooth and very effective. We haven't had any issues. 

I'm not sure if a different solution was used previously.

The installation was not complex. It was pretty simple and pretty straightforward.

The deployment is pretty fast. It takes ten minutes, at a maximum, to set up.

You only need one person for deployment and maintenance. 

I didn't need the help of any third-party integrator or consultant. I was able to handle it myself. 

The solution is pretty affordable. Sometimes you can get a Microsoft voucher to get some sort of discount.

I'd rate the solution a ten out of ten.

The solution is being used at Kuwait University for different things, such as email systems.

Overall the solution functions very well, such as the ability to access it from the cloud.

I have been using Azure Active Directory for approximately eight years.

The stability of Azure Active Directory is good.

Azure Active Directory has been scalable.

If we have any problems we contact the local reseller, and if we need to contact Microsoft, we do it directly.

We were previously using Microsoft Active Directory which was not on the cloud. Having Azure Active Directory on the cloud is a benefit.

The initial setup is simple. There is not a need to do any installation or configuration, you only make a subscription and you run it.

There is a subscription model that is used for Azure Active Directory.

The subscription should be categorized by business size. For example, small companies should have a discounted price, this would help small companies and the organization to be automated.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Azure Active Directory a ten out of ten.

There were a couple of use cases I've dealt with. In one scenario, I had to import on-premise users to my Azure AD. We had a couple of mobile applications where we were using the authentication feature from Azure AD. 

We needed to create a new infrastructure for one of the clients and everything had to be taken care of by the Azure infrastructure. In that case, we used Azure AD for all kinds of user management tasks, as well as authentication.

We simply use Azure AD and everything is taken care of instantly. You need not worry about user management. Everything is taken care of by Azure AD itself. You just simply have it in your application and everything is done out-of-the-box.

Azure AD, overall, is quite good for securing your applications as well as the infrastructure. 

I like that they provide most of the authentication flows out-of-the-box, so you do not need to do anything specific to tackle any authentication flows.

Azure AD has affected our organization's security positively. In terms of the application, it's quite good. There was very minimal leakage. We had a single instance and that user was already compromised. Otherwise, it's quite good.

Azure AD provides two types of features. One is Azure AD Excel and is already B2C. Out of both versions, Azure B2C requires some improvement, in terms of user management and role management, et cetera.

I've used the solution for approximately one to one-and-a-half years.

The stability is quite high - if we are talking about Azure AD and not Azure AD B2C.

The scalability capabilities are quite high. We have somewhere around 5 million users, and it was doing quite well even with that number.

I haven't interacted much with technical support, however, during one of the instances where we required some help, which was not related to the Azure AD, they provided us quite good support.

I have tried one competitor, IdentityServer. It is basically an open-source solution. In terms of comparison, Azure AD is quite solid. When it comes to IdentityServer, you need to manage everything on your own. You need to host everything and you have to take care of the whole application life cycle with that identity cycle. In the case of Azure AD it's an almost managed service.

I found the initial setup process quite straightforward.

In terms of implementation, Microsoft provides very good documentation of how to kick off Azure AD. You just need to follow those instructions and it will be done in a couple of clicks.

They do have a tier of service that is free that supports many people. You can also purchase a license and costs can be reduced on the Microsoft side.

My previous organization has a very close relationship with Microsoft.

I would advise users to go with Azure AD, if possible, and to try to avoid the B2C version at the moment, as quite a few good features are already in the preview. Once those preview features are done, you can go with the B2C version. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

My primary use case is to access our company resources. I'm a solution architect and we are customers of Authenticator.

I use this solution on a daily basis and it's a very functional app. that adds an extra layer when it comes to securing the data owned by my company. It's quite easy to deploy. 

I'd like to see integration between applications and phones included in the solution. It would also be helpful to have support for the kind of integration you see between Facebook and Google, support with protocols from one application on the internet or SaaS to another one. I've seen several kinds of applications in the area of risky behavior that are a little better in other solutions.

I've been using this solution for a year. 

The solution always works, it's stable. 

The solution is scalable, we have around 40,000 users in our company. 

I have previously used other products but Authenticator is included in the Microsoft license suite package so the decision to go with it was commercial. 

The solution is connected with Intune in the cloud so implementation is very easy and took me less than five minutes. Everything is updated via Microsoft cloud delivery.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution to take users into our AD. That's the basic purpose. We are using it in our whole organization so that our AD is synced.

Overall, the solution is quite good. 

There are a few additional functionalities that are very compatible. For example, device management is there and creating a custom role, which reduces the task of restricting the user from AD, if the person is on the on-premise AD. If they're using on-premise, they have to create a distribution list, then apply Azure to that. It's simplified in Azure AD, making it easy to create roles and assign them to the users. 

In fact, the device management and role assignments are great. These two features I found very compatible. For device management, if you are using an on-prem AD, you have to use some other software like Google admin to manage the devices. However, here, it is integrated into Azure AD. That's a positive aspect of the solution.

Regarding the role assignments, it's a very flexible way to restrict the user, or, if you want to customize access, that can be done as well.

The activity log, which is a way to see who made what changes, is quite useful.

Azure AD has features that helped improve our security posture. It is SSO - Single Sign-On. We can manage the users very easily and we can apply SSO and MFA to them. 

I'll give it a score of four out of five for the security posture on offer.

For whatever company I'm working for, we cannot fully put the data on the cloud due to compliance. Rather, you have to keep some data on-premises. That’s why it’s great that we can use the hybrid approach with Microsoft.

Azure AD  has not affected our end-user experience in any way. The transition is also quite smooth. If you're using an AD Connect to sync from your on-premises to your Azure AD, nothing has come up from the end-users in terms of issues or problems.

It has made our work easier in that it’s simplified everything for us. It has eliminated a few of the third-party tools, which we used to use. For example, we had a dependency on Google admin due to the fact that we could see where we could manage the devices of the user. That has been integrated directly to Azure AD.

The solution has not saved costs. While we’ve eliminated some tools, there are some other features that we are dependent on as admin, which is not yet integrated with Azure AD.

Other features have a broader scope and are covered under Azure. If, for example, I want to create a workflow, that cannot be done in Azure AD. That is something that is done in the Azure function or Azure logic app. Parts have to be covered in other functions. 

Longer-term, there are some features which might be added, such as admin features similar to Google admin. If I'm an employee and I'm exiting the company, for example, I need to transfer that data from myself to my manager. For that, maybe they could include a feature where they can transfer the data from the user directly and we don't have to rely on any admins.

I've been using Azure AD for one and a half years. Before, we were on-premises.

The stability is quite good. It has already been integrated with SSO or MFA. From a security perspective, it's quite stable. 

The scalability is pretty fair. Azure is doing quite good work in the cloud. It's one of the top clouds. Scalability is not an issue, for Azure AD at least.

We have approximately 800 users overall, between our India and Phoenix offices.

We have ten administrators working with this tool in your organization. They are mostly assistant admins. There are two people who are working as global administrators. They do all the configurations.

I haven't worked with Microsoft regarding this solution.

My past experience is limited to Azure AD. We also work with Azure Monitor and Azure Logic.

The initial setup is pretty much a straightforward process. I've set up another AD Connect and the process was done in 15 minutes. If you have proper documentation, you can go through it very, very smoothly. That's what my understanding is.

The solution doesn't require any maintenance. 

We've definitely seen an ROI. I can't speak to the pricing part, however, when I see it as an administrator, I definitely see the value for money for our organization. A lot of functionalities have been added, with still more plans to add a few more features. There clearly has been a value addition.

I don't have any insight on the pricing end as that is always managed by our team leader. They take care of all the pricing activities, et cetera. Any pricing-related information I don't have knowledge of. 

In terms of deployment, we are on a hybrid structure, where we are using an AD Connect to sync our on-prem users to Azure.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

A lot of functions have been included as compared to the on-premises deployment. Compared with competitors such as AWS and Google Cloud, it is in a different league. For example, AWS also has good features, however, this is more simplified and it's a Microsoft product, so you can rely on it for the long term.