Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

My primary use case is for Azure Active Directory is user management, creating users, assigning them access to network resources, network drives, resetting passwords, and dissembling users.

This solution has helped my organization by allowing us simple management of identities within the organization for integration with the single sign-on system unifying access to applications for mobile devices and management. 

AD is the starting point for the unification of access control, or for using those identities within AD. Without it, we would not be able to give our users access to applications from different devices, whether they are Mac OS, Windows 10, Android, or any other operating system.

Azure Active Directory is a very simple utility to use, it has very good visibility and transparency, and an easy-to-use panel.

I have been using Azure Active Directory for approximately one year.

Azure Active Directory's stability is very high.

The scalability is good.

The technical support could improve by having a faster response time.

I rate the support of Azure Active Directory a three out of five.

If you have been running an on-premises implementation of Active Directory Domain Services, then it is only a migration. You migrate the identities from on-premises to the cloud. 

If you are setting it up from scratch, it can be easy too. You can do the migration by using Azure AD Connect, which is mostly a straightforward process.

Everything begins with the design of the domain structure. If it is well designed, then it is simple to adopt AD from scratch. I am not sure about migrations from other implementations of identity control, but if you are starting from scratch, it is very easy to use.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Azure Active Directory a nine out of ten.

I have been using Azure Active Directory mainly for access management, identity governance, access reviews, and patent management.

All of the features are amazing, such as identity governance and privileged identity management.

Azure Active Directory could benefit by adding the capability for identity life cycle for the on-premise solution. For example, an HR solution, which is built on-premise or, in general, better on-premise capable solutions.

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

Azure Active Directory is highly stable.

I have found Azure Active Directory to be scalable.

Every time I open a support case or support ticket, the response is very quick. They have been able to have a resolution to the issues I have had in a timely manner.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The E5 plan we are using contains the premium plans for Azure Active Directory. We are not paying only for the Azure Active Directory Premium licenses. We have it already included within our E5 plan.

I would recommend Azure Active Directory to others. it is integrated with all Microsoft platforms. It has a lot of useful features that can help security IT administrators.

I rate Azure Active Directory a ten out of ten.

We have an Azure active directory and we also have our own on-prem AD instances.

We basically use the solution for user management, group management, policy management.

The portal version of the Azure active directory is pretty robust.

The solution is very good for different types of management, including, user, group and policy management requirements.

The integration between the Azure active directory and the traditional active directory could be improved upon. We have two active directories that are installed on virtual machines, which are traditional active directories. The interactions between the two are very limited. For example, I could modify users in our own private instances of AD, however, they won't propagate up to the Azure active directory and vice versa. For us, the integrations are the biggie between the on-prem or the self-hosted AD versus Azure AD.

The traditional AD instances that we maintain have UIs that are very archaic and monolithic and very difficult to navigate. They should update the UI to make it easier to navigate and make it overall more modern.

We've been using the solution for a while. We are actively using it now.

We're using the latest version of the solution at this time.

In general, I would rate this solution at an eight out of ten.

If there were better integration capabilities between active directories, I would likely rate this product higher.

We need it for running MSA protection for most of the users. We need Azure AD Connect because they are highly on primary setup, so they need to sync on primary with Azure AD.

From the beginning when I joined the company, they were already using Azure AD Premium. The most wanted features would be the synchronization between the Windows AD, Azure AD, because there are so many capabilities that just because we can't sync their own from Azure AD.

The most beneficial feature would be the effectiveness of having a hybrid set-up. When we need to create an account, we create it in Auto Activator 3. Even though the users are created and managed in Windows really, we can use all the benefits of the cloud, as well.

Right now I can't point out a particular feature, but sometimes when we work, it evolves.  There are so many features that are out recently, so it'd be hard to set up MSA for obvious remote users, so users who are using Azure are hard to use it remotely. So, while we're setting that up, we have face of issues which show the limitations of Azure.

Initially, we wanted to exclude specific users from MSA. So, we had a condition policy, which forces MSA for all the users. So we wanted to exclude users who are using an NPS extension.  So it was not listed, as a NPS extension was not listed outside an application, in actual, so, we go back and were not able to exclude users using NPS extension from MSA. So that was one limitation that we found and we had to work around that.

We noticed recent additions on display that have been in recent updates. On the board, there are some features that still need help. 

The stability is pretty good. Earlier, there were freezes here and there. But, we overcame it. What w have now is stable, but they are trying to include more features.

We have almost 500 users. So, it is pretty easy. They are including more features, which enhances onboarding and decommissioning users. From an actual perspective, it's pretty easy to scale.

Tech support has its up and downs. So, sometimes it will take one week, and other times two weeks to resolve a case. Sometimes they have to respond fast, and they do so. It is not consistent.

It's really affordable. It does not feel as if it is too costly. It's okay to spend this money for this product or feature. Yeah, I think it's affordable.

If you have connections with a PSP partner, it will be easy, I guess. If you're buying an Azure AD Premium independently, you won't have a helping hand from them. You'll have support  but, not much other than that. With a PSP partner, you will feel like that you can implement or you can quadrate.

Once Azure is developed, and fully established, it will be a perfect product. It is still in the development stage at present. 

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.

I like Intune's MDM and MI.

I would like it if Intune could manage MacOS or iOS directly. Right now, we have to use a third-party solution. 

I've been working with Intune for four years

I think Intune is more stable compared to five years ago.

Intune's scalability is better now that it's on the cloud. We can deploy to all of our devices without performance suffering.  

Microsoft support is good.

My customers usually do a pilot project. Then it goes to the IT department after that. If they are happy with the features and functionality, then they will deploy it to the users. We typically have no problems, but sometimes we face issues with older devices.

I would like to see Microsoft offer discounts for larger Intune deployments.

I rate Intune nine out of 10. If the user is working with a Microsoft device or license, Intune is really powerful because it has a bundled license. Still, if we need to manage another system, Intune is too expensive. If the ecosystem is Microsoft, I recommend Intune because it's Microsoft's end-to-end solution. 

I primarily use this solution for hybrid deployment, security, securing resources and for integration purposes. In terms of security, we have been using the B2B/B2C hybrid integration with the certificate authentication.

From a practice point of view, of storing secrets internally on Azure AD, we use the certificate when we can.

I would advise to allow an ex-client user to change their password. At present, you can only change your password externally if your password is still valid. If your password is expired, you cannot actually do it through Azure AD.

Most of the time, this product is doing purpose-built solutions. Some people on my team like the multi-step authentication. Others like the fact that it secures their resources externally.

We found the ADFS being a redundant part of the solution. But, it was removed. The licensing is a bit confusing if you are not going into the premium model.

Three to five years.

It is pretty good in terms of stability. I have not had any issues. It has not crashed.

In terms of scalability, we have not had any formal issues or outages from the solution. We are currently using it for 100 users. But, our clients are also using it, and I think we have at least several thousand clients using it.

The initial setup was straightforward. It has been improving a lot in the past couple of years. Yes, it is a lot easier now than when I first started working with this solution. 

I would estimate that the initial setup would probably take a team a week to set up.

When implementing for one client, where they had ADFS turned on, we could not ID enough ADFS and when there was no internet connection. This was a Catch-22 for us, and very frustrating. I would advise new users to use Azure over the ADFS.

I use Authenticator across my company for controlling access to our platforms and data.

The most valuable feature is the prompt for a number so that you're sure what you're seeing is what you're agreeing to.

It would be an improvement if Authenticator made it easier to recover the app if you reboot your cellphone and lose access.

Authenticator is stable.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Don't delay implementing this solution, it's the best thing you can do for your identity protection. I would rate Authenticator as nine out of ten.