Microsoft Identity Manager Reviews

We use the synchronization service the company provides for data synchronization. We're customers of Microsoft and I'm the company manager. 

The synchronization tool is very powerful and when compared to other vendors the license fees are great - it comes free with the Windows Server license. It's a great product and works like a framework with very good flexibility. the SQL Server connections can be like SSL and I find that very useful. 

We always need to log into the servers to do anything which means that the product is not very user friendly because we can't invoke it. You can't open it from your laptop, for example. If someone needs to carry out a joining or some other functionality which doesn't require them to be an admin but just a regular user doing something else, they need to log in to the server and we need to provide privileges for that. 

The other issue is the SQL Server. The solution is tightly tied to the SQL Server, which means it does not have any compatibility with the AWS RDS and it doesn't support the SQL Server RDS version. It also means there is a very high dependency on the SQL and for that reason instead of RDS we need to set up our own SQL Server on EC2 and I think that is something which they need to change. There's no compatability for Azure to manage the SQL Servers. It doesn't need to be vendor specific, but it should be able to support whichever database is provided by the vendor. 

I'd like to see more connectivity in the synchronization. What they currently have should be expanded. You should be able to connect to Azure AD Connect and get more cloud support.
And again, the program should be able to connect to any of the cloud SQL. 

I've been using this solution since 2008. 

The Identity Manager portal has a lot of issues with SharePoint and we need to buy a SharePoint license too. If the company is not at all into Microsoft it's very difficult. Getting version upgrades is very difficult for the portal. We use automated scripts for maintenance. 

In terms of scalability, they don't have a proper roadmap. It's one of the disadvantages of the solution and one of the reasons we're looking for an alternative. The license we have is user-based. Everything is automatic. We don't need to go or do anything it's like automatically synchronized.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. It took us about a month. Our internal team was responsible for the implementation ourselves.

I would rate this solution a five out of 10. 

Its interface and the fact that it's integrated with everything in the Microsoft ecosystem are the most valuable features. It integrates well with the operating systems, other apps, and servers, and it's easy to see exactly who's accessing what and so on.

The prices can always be improved, and the integration with the software from other vendors could use an improvement, especially if you are using something like Oracle for a database, SAP for ERP, or something like that.

Internally, we have been using this solution for about four years. We are using its latest version.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 9 out of 10 in terms of stability.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 10 out of 10 in terms of scalability. We have around 500 users.

I'd rate their support a 9 out of 10.

Positive

We've been using the previous versions of Microsoft Identity Manager before this. It was on-premises. So, we've had it implemented for some time, and then we upgraded it to the next version. Overall, we've had it for about 10 years.

I didn't participate in its implementation.

We noticed some ROI because the people in our IT department have a lot more time to do other things instead of constantly watching the infrastructure. If something is wrong, they get a notification, and they don't have to stay up 24/7 with their eyes on what's going on with the infrastructure. There is about 15% ROI.

The prices can always be improved. I'd rate it a 4 out of 10 in terms of pricing.

I'd recommend doing a proof of concept and watching out for the prerequisites and what it needs to function properly so that you don't start an implementation and find out that you need something else, such as SQL Server for a database or an analytics space. Read the requirements carefully and start with a proof of concept to see exactly how the people from the IT department are working with this solution and whether it would help them. That's because if they are not comfortable with the solution, they will use more time to understand it than to monitor the infrastructure.

Overall, I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager an 8 out of 10.

We use Microsoft Identity Manager for application identification and single sign-on processes for different applications.

The product allows us to track the logins easily. We can find out if someone is trying to attack Boot Guard.

The product's pricing and integration features could be improved.

We have been using Microsoft Identity Manager for a couple of years.

The product is 99.9% stable. Although, sometimes, internal configurations or improvements made in the vendor's system may cause an impact on our systems as well.

I rate the product’s scalability a ten out of ten.

I rate the product’s initial setup process an eight out of ten. We encounter difficulties integrating legacy systems with the product in Azure environment. It takes a few weeks to complete the process.

It is an expensive tool.

Microsoft Identity Manager has good functionality, but its pricing is too high. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We are currently using a hybrid identity access management solution. We've got an on-premise ADFS that is running a Server 2016 ADFS farm. That is coupled to a Microsoft Identity Management Server 2016, which is then coupled to Azure Active Directory as the cloud-based identity and access management solution.

We're a partner and a reseller. We're a Microsoft Gold Partner and Cloud Platform, and we have achieved the Microsoft competency at the highest level due to our commitment to delivering successful solutions in both on-premises and cloud-based environments. So we are a Microsoft delivery partner and a Tier 2 reseller. In other words, we're reselling Microsoft licenses. 

We're also a deployment partner for Microsoft services, meaning that we can deploy services and migrate customers and design solutions and be involved in adoption and innovation programs on behalf of Microsoft. So we're a big partner in Microsoft solutions.

The feature that I find most valuable is the security layer of the identity and access management solution. The ability to secure on-premise and cloud-based workloads and to provide seamless authentication into hybrid workloads. In addition to cloud-based authentication, we've also got advanced adaptive authentication with a privileged identity management feature for protecting identities.

In terms of the identity and access management solution for an on-premise environment, I think Microsoft needs to eliminate or minimize the number of workloads for the solution to run in an on-premise environment.

For example, you need more instances, more servers on-premise for the whole solution to completely function. You need ADFS servers, farms application proxies, a MIM server, SQL databases, and Cluster databases, which leads to more costs in running and maintaining the solution.

I think Microsoft should minimize the number of instances in terms of hardware and software.

In the next edition, I prefer that Microsoft would start looking at giving the solution the ability to integrate on-premise workloads, specifically Linux on-premise workloads, with the cloud-based identity and access management solution, which is Microsoft Azure Active Directory. Currently, the provided Microsoft identity and access management solution does not have the capability to integrate with a Linux or Unix environment and the cloud-based Azure Active Directory.

I'm satisfied with the stability. It is quite stable these days because Microsoft updates all of its identity management solution technologies monthly. In terms of stability, I'm quite impressed.

I'm not quite impressed with the scalability of the solution, because you need more workloads in terms of scalability. For small businesses, I wouldn't recommend the Microsoft identity and management solution for on-premises environments for SMBs, because they won't see any return on investment since they will still need to invest in hardware, which is quite costly, and also in software. Maintaining the solution in general also requires more workload and instances to operate, so I wouldn't recommend on-premises environment for small businesses.

That is why most of my customers are enterprise customers. They will be best with a complex environment. Specifically, they will have hybrid environments that are running the on-premises MIM, Microsoft Identity Management.

For cloud-based identity and access management solution for Microsoft, specifically the Microsoft Azure Active Directory, it's an excellent solution for small businesses. It's excellent and it's easy to scale because you don't need to be an enterprise business to protect your applications with Azure Active Directory. It's quite good for cloud-based environments.

They provide excellent support. Now when you log a call with them they engage with you until they resolve the solution. They give you a dedicated engineer, a PSE specifically, to come and correct any issues.

To be honest, the on-premise configuration is complex. You need to know what you are doing to successfully deploy the solution. You need components such as an SSL certificate. Also, you can't use a self-signed certificate. You need a certificate with a publicly known CA, such as GoDaddy or DigiCert. Additionally, you need to configure your application proxies, all your ADFS and MIM servers, and also the database servers correctly. It's quite complex, you need to know what you're doing in terms of getting the solution up to speed.

My advice to someone implementing this solution would be to implement the on-premise identity and access management solution if they've got more than 1,000 identities on-premise. I strongly recommend implementing an on-premise environment in that case, or if they are a financial institution, such as a bank or underwriting institution. They also should implement the hybrid deployment, which means there would be an integration of the identity management solution sitting on-premises and a combination of the Azure Active Directory as an identity and access management in the cloud-based environment.

For small businesses, I would recommend that they implement the cloud-based identity and access management solution, leveraging the provided Azure Active Directory by Microsoft.

I'd give Microsoft Identity Manager a rating of nine out of ten. I'm giving it a nine because I'm looking at the hybrid scenario and more strongly on the cloud-based identity and access management solution for Microsoft. It has a lot of features; it has all the bells and whistles of identity and access management, such as adaptive MFA, intelligent graph security API, and being powered by Microsoft Graph API. Also, the multi-factor authentication is easy to set up, with a single button. For Windows environments, you just install one application API, called AD Connect, to sync all the on-premises identity to the Microsoft Azure Active Directory.

The reason why I'm not giving it a ten is that they still need to upgrade their solution to enable a new feature to accommodate Linux and Unix identity directory specifically to integrate with Microsoft Azure Active Directory. It seems as if the company does not want to provide that capability because now they are focusing on growing their own Microsoft Azure cloud, which means they are forcing all those customers that are running the Linux or Unix environment to come and migrate or lift and shift all their Linux or Unix workloads into Microsoft Azure. I think they are focusing on growing their own environment, which is why they are not providing this capability.

MIM allows for easier provisioning of Outlook mailboxes.

MIM's most valuable feature is its connectivity with Exchange.

MIM's reliability could be improved.

I've been using this solution for ten years.

MIM's stability is excellent.

MIM's scalability is excellent.

Microsoft's technical support is excellent.

Positive

We used SailPoint previously, but MIM is cheaper and easier to administer.

The initial setup was complex - I would rate the setup experience as two out of five.

We deployed using an in-house team, which took six months.

MIM gives a high return on investment.

MIM is free with a Microsoft Azure license.

We evaluated SailPoint and NetIQ.

I would give MIM a rating of ten out of ten.

We use the solution for authentication management.

The product’s simplicity and integration are valuable. All the accounts are linked to Microsoft.

The security could be slightly improved.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

There are more than 100 users in our organization. I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The support team is quite knowledgeable. Getting a support person is quite challenging, though.

Neutral

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. The solution is deployed on the cloud. It took us a few days to deploy it. Multiple business, technical, and security teams are involved in the deployment process.

The product helps us save 10 to 20% of our time.

The solution is expensive. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

I recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I have an ongoing project with my clients that encompasses research.

Hypbrid cloud is the major case, also some on Mobile Application developing.

Customer point of view, MIM work as / or together with SSO to extend the authentication, empowers orgnization agility by adopting new apps faster 

Identity 
Security 
Access Managment is the three I can think of. why? they transpass the hybrid barrier, and it's from Microsoft, fits in M365 applicaiton well

The product could be more friendly for non-native English speakers. It would also be better if it were more intuitive and visually attractive.

Microsoft Identity Manager was designed for the on-premise environment. If you want to implement a cloud-based application, so you will run into some problems, including the transport of the token from the applicant, the application side, the mobile application side through the firewall, and the transfer to the backend for authentication. That part is not quite convenient. It is very slow.

I have been using this solution for a few years. 

It is a stable product. You will experience some issues with it, but it's a good product. Identity is a complex thing, multifactor authentication is yet another, what add on this complexity is the wild Internet, if you focus enough，MIM or AAD will be you best choice. 

Microsoft Identity Manager is a scalable product. It allows for multiple users that can work together.

The primary use case is for the single migration of the user from on-premises to Azure Active Directory in the cloud. It is also used for the Microsoft authentication application for mobile devices.

We authenticate on the smart device back to back so they can access their emails and other applications.

We are planning to use this for the Windows 10 authentication as well as directly from the Azure Active Directory.

The most valuable and most interesting feature is the conditional access. 

It can provide a low formulation combination based on the extra files that we can work on to verify the solution.

The information that is available for the Active Directory portal is segregated here and there. It's not in one single location where you can see, for example, all of the security features and maybe the customization feature.

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see the manageability, the web-based access to the portal, and the reconfiguration of things to be made simpler and more straightforward.

We have been selling this solution for the last five years.

It's stable, but it's maybe a bit more challenging than I have seen in the last five years.

This solution is scalable. We have plans to increase our usage in the future.

The number of users varies. There can be anywhere from 10,000 to maybe more than 100,000 users, who are made up of IT, administrators, managers, and architects.

We have been in touch with technical support. They are good. Normally they are available to assist and they are knowledgable.

Our previous system was based on an on-premises solution. Now, the on-premises products are integrated with the cloud, which is what made the difference.

The initial setup is straightforward and can be deployed in one week.

It was installed by my internal team.

I would say that it's the best solution on the market and I would go ahead with it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.