Microsoft Intune Reviews

We use it for proposing solutions to customers and for co-management of the end-user devices, as well as for unified endpoint management. We also use it for mobile device management.

Internet-based access with security is what I have found to be most valuable.

It is also a stable and scalable solution. We have not had any issues with technical support as well.

The initial setup is straightforward too.

Currently, for a new customer or when a device refresh occurs, I can introduce Microsoft Intune as a unified endpoint management solution. However, for an existing customer who has an SCCM it would need to be upgraded to an MECM first before I can introduce Microsoft Intune.

Microsoft even recommends it as a co-management solution because even if I need to go for UVM as a unified endpoint, I need to rebuild all the missions, which is not practical. So, they need to look into it and provide an easy and flexible moment to UEM.

I've been dealing with Microsoft Intune for at least fours years.

Stability-wise, it is good and stable.

It has very good scalability.

We have had no issues with technical support.

The initial setup is easy. Deployment usually takes around eight weeks of time, including pilot testing. We do requirement gathering, designing, and building, so it takes us a minimum of eight weeks.

From a solution perspective, I always recommend that you go for it. From a scalability aspect and on managing the devices over the internet and ensuring that the security of the devices for customers is always taken into account, we always recommend to Microsoft Intune.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this solution at nine.

Primarily we are rolling the product out because we want to be able to have remote access and control over our desktops and laptops from external locations.  

The most valuable aspect of the product when it is in production is the basic thing it was made to do. We want to be able to allow access to various applications remotely which we can not otherwise do with remote workers.  

This type of question may be premature because we have just started rolling it out now. We have not had a chance to work with it to capacity at this stage. I think, so far the implementation is all a bit shaky and should be better planned and better supported. The deployment seems to not be as simple as what I would have hoped that it would be considering it is a Microsoft product.  

When it is fully rolled out, we will see where the other shortcomings actually are. However, this difficulty in rolling the product out is a significant stumbling block.  

We just started testing the product several months ago. The technical team is working toward trying to roll it out to production in about the month. As that is the case, we are not really using it yet in production. We have got only about half-a-dozen of the 4,000 projected users working with it currently.  

Again we have not really tested and deployed the product broadly across the company at this stage. But it is exactly because we have not seen the kind of stability and performance we were expecting that we have not completed the roll out.  

If we can not seem to get even half a dozen users working with the product in a way we consider stable, the scalability is in question. It should not be.  

As far as the set up, we only have the first half-a-dozen technical people on the product just to do a pilot. We have had issues with it. This is the reason we have not even deployed it for the users' space yet to deploy to a larger test group. I would expect the deployment would be a bit easier. That could eventually be a changing factor in what we do moving forward.  

I have rolled our company onto a 365 E5 licensing scheme. We are not on E3 anymore so we do not need to. With an E3 license, you would have to consider licensing the product.  

We did not really look at any other competition. We are a Microsoft 365 E5 customer and the product promises the capabilities that we need and is available without additional cost. It just made sense to try to use this part of the suite.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best. I would rate Microsoft Intune as about a six. I am not totally impressed with the complexity of the rollout. 

We propose Intune for information protection. We integrate Intune for application management and protection of company information on mobile devices.

It's normally able to meet 100% expectations of our customers. 

Sometimes, customers compare it with AirWatch, but the concept of Intune is different from other solutions. It's an application management app. It gets a bit difficult to explain it to customers, but it's not a product limitation. It takes a presale document or presentation to explain it to customers.

I've been working with Microsoft Intune for more than five years.

It's stable.

It's scalable. Our client has 1,000 people.

I'd rate them a ten out of ten. All of the ticket questions are answered. 

Normally, customers need a pilot. It takes around two or three weeks for the pilot. After that, we do the deployment. We start with a limited number of policies. Overall, it's done in three to four weeks.

We have five people in the company for implementation.

Its price is fair. It's a normal price. It isn't too expensive or too cheap.

Overall, I'd rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Intune for controlling and managing all of our in-house and remote devices. It allows us to deploy applications to all devices.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune is having all our devices compliant with our policies.

The solution can have some compliance problems in general and the end-point user can bypass easily the company policies in Intune.

I have been using Microsoft Intune for approximately three years.

I have not had any problems with the stability of Microsoft Intune.

The solution is deployed for end users and all of our devices.

Microsoft Intune scales well.

I have not used the support from Microsoft Intune.

I have not used a similar solution to Microsoft Intune.

The solution is worth the money for us.

We have the business premium licenses for the solution.

I rate Microsoft Intune a nine out of ten.

Generally, the top three uses are operating system deployments, software updates and patching, and software deployments to endpoints.

If you're a small shop, a two-person organization, yet you have many endpoints, five to 10,000, you can easily manage them. You can manage the masses with one person part-time and it's a good automation tool that takes away the need for multiple folks to do a lot of things in the environment like software deployments or patch management. It's very good at automating those functions.

The reporting aspect is very nice. It's got about 450 canned reports in it. They're easily customizable. You can get really good granular reports for inventory, patch management, status, and everything. It's very good at reporting.

It's not hard to set up. It's easy to manage.

Third-party patching and other solutions integrate with Endpoint Manager. From that perspective, there's no deficiency. 

The UI is good. You can filter things out so that you'll only see things that are pertinent to your function. 

It's really matured and improved over the years by assimilating competing products. There are a lot of things that used to be better than Endpoint Manager or not available in Endpoint Manager that were absorbed or purchased and placed into this product. From a deficiency perspective, I can't recall coming across anything substantial. I'm trying to think of a weakness. I compared it to Ivanti. From a new user's perspective, it may be a little overwhelming because there are quite a few things to look at in the console, however, once you are sort of acclimated and are familiar with your core functions, it's fairly simple and straightforward.

You can modernize the UI a little bit, however, change for a sake of change isn't always a good thing.

I've been using the solution for 25 years. It used to be called SCCM.

The solution is very stable.

The scalability is great.

The largest user base I've ever supported, for example, was a headquarters and they had 220,000 endpoints. In contrast, small colleges and educations may only have 500 users, so they can get by with a single server hosting everything. SQL and everything can be one server.

For us, the solution is extensively used.

If you're looking forward to deficiency, I'd say that the Endpoint Manager support at the lower levels is poor. As you go higher and you get like a more engineering level, then you're fine, however, the early stages of support are not the best.

I've worked with Ivanti and LANdesk and other tools.

I've used Endpoint Manager every day. I'm currently using it. I've been using it for 25 years. However, there are other ones like BigFix, which I've rarely used. I've used LANdesk a few times. And people would try to use LANdesk to avoid the expensive Endpoint Manager, however, at the end of the day, it costs them more in time to use the LANdesk solution. Ivanti is a competitor, however, they're cobbled together with Shavlik, for patch management they've got Altiris. They bought Altiris and Altiris has been passed around like a cheap hoe from Symantec to Intel, to everybody.

Altiris was actually developed to support Endpoint Manager and provide asset management. At the time, Endpoint Manager didn't have good asset management, so they actually worked with Altiris, only to find out that Altiris was actively taking Microsoft customers. Microsoft booted them to the curb and they haven't done well since. That was back probably in the late nineties that they did that. Endpoint Manager has been around the longest, it's survived, it's matured and it's the top dog in general.

Complexity-wise, it's not hard to set up. It's just a lot of small steps, such as making sure the firewall ports are open and certain things are in place, and all the perquisites are taken care of, as the wizard, the installation wizard for Endpoint Manager, is pretty straightforward. As long as you have SQL and some other features turned on to support the different functions of Endpoint Manager, you're fine. You'll need WSS or you'll need WSS for patching and you'll need SQL reporting services for the reporting portion of it. All those small things. The more lights you turn on, the more configuration you have to do.

The deployment itself took me four hours end to end, to put all the prerequisites in, however, understanding, of course, may take a while for someone new. I've done this now for over 25 years. For me, it's pretty straightforward and I have, a lot of these things PowerShell scripted so it works very well. You can create a PowerShell script and set the whole thing up from Powershell, which is what I've done.

Maintenance requirements are low. Since it lives on SQL, if you put a SQL maintenance plan in place, it's pretty much, it's very healthy, it's very stable.

We've seen an ROI. It enables you to pair down the resources necessary for configuration management. You don't need a large shop to maintain your environment. If you want to develop it, if you want to create new images all the time and that sort of thing, then you're going to need to staff yourself accordingly, however, not necessarily to support Endpoint Manager, just to develop those and payloads that it delivers.

I'm a partner. I'm using the most up-to-date version of the solution.

While the solution was on-prem initially, now it's converted to more of a hybrid. They have co-management so you can manage on-prem and cloud together.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Mostly the pricing can be improved. If you are using the solution with EMS E3, then it's very expensive, but if you are using it in combination with a lot of products, then it can be cheap. Microsoft doesn't sell Intune separately. That's another consideration. The third thing would be how to view the use case because Microsoft doesn't release any documentation on how to view it when you adopt Microsoft EMS. 

Their technical support could also be improved.

It is very stable.

It's scalable because this is a cloud solution only. They don't have it on-premises.

With Microsoft technical support, they only fix Teams and when they are open, they're mostly trying to close again at the quickest time. Sometimes, the solutions given are not very good.

It depends on the use case. If you only focus on Mobile Device Management, then it is very easy to setup. You just have to define the use case in the context you want to protect. If you are talking about how to integrate with the lock analytics and how to classify data in context, then this is another thing.

The main difference between Intune and Workspace ONE is the quality integration between Microsoft products and Office 365, which means that Intune is part of a solution; you are not only using Intune, but you have to think about its ecosystem. For example, with EMS, it will have at least three products. The first is Azure ID Premium, which is the IAM solution (Identity and Access Management), so there are use cases where you might need to use IAM. The one difference between EMS and Workspace ONE, since Workspace ONE doesn't focus on identity management, is that it only has the access part. It can leverage all identity management, like with the directory or any of the identity solutions. 

The second difference is in the integration with Office 365 because in the Office 365 ecosystem, you have a lot of products, like Azure Information Protection, which is focused on the labeling and classifying of data. Microsoft also has Defender DLP and Defender for Endpoint. These make up a total solution. Based on that, if you have a long-term roadmap, you can actually integrate it with other Microsoft security solutions, like Sentinel, which is a SIEM solution. When choosing Intune, the main difference is the ecosystem and the roadmap.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

For advice, it depends on the use case you are trying to solve here. If we have a look at the use case for security, how would you control the mobile? How would you deploy? How would you protect them based on that? The lesson depends on the answers to those questions.

We primarily use the solution for device management. 

There are a lot of use cases, however, the base is the mobile security for our corporate devices and deployment of applications. We are a worldwide organization and in many countries. There are also country-based use cases, or areas that incorporate these use cases for some specific business units such as healthcare and similar SAP solutions. We have a lot of small areas where we use this, however, the main driver is improving the security of the devices and providing some automation configuration for the users including VPN solutions and corporate WiFi connections, applications, et cetera.

If I compared this product to XenMobile, except the conditional access, which was also partially possible to integrate with Citrix XenMobile, then there is not much difference between the two. The functionality s very good. However, the main way this has improved our organization is that there is support for conditional access and native integration with Office 365 services which we migrated to. 

The integration with conditional access is great. That's maybe the most important aspect of the solution.

The pricing is very good.

We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product.

For the most part, the solution is stable.

As a cloud solution, the scalability on offer is great.

There are a lot of small use cases where we realized that some technical solution was missing in Microsoft in comparison to other products. For example, it lacks something similar to sensing or location-based rules and configurations.

We would like, for example, integrated remote control or a remote session tool or something like this. You must have TeamViewer and the integration with this is limited and it's extra money. Nothing is built-in. Some functionalities are really limited to fully managed devices and so on. It took a long time for them to integrate the big ECS infrastructure into the corporate devices. This is now done, however, it took a longer time than expected.

Technical support could be h=better.

We've used the solution for the last three years, starting with the integration. 

The solution is pretty stable. As it is in the cloud, there are not many issues in terms of a service outage or things like this. Maybe when there are new patches integrated every month, which sometimes happens, some functionality may be influenced or affected. It's more or less a small issue, however, issues are possible. I don't recall a situation where downtime happened or users were really affected, however. It's just an occasional issue we may have with a patch that we would need to address.

The solution is quite scalable. As a cloud product, there are no issues surrounding expanding if you need to. 

We have maybe 27,000 people using the solution at this time. There is a plan to have all mobile users in this solution, so we are talking about 70,000 users at some point. However, it's a question also of the licenses, as you have to have a license for that product.

Technical support is hit and miss. Sometimes it's really good and other times it's not so great.

We used Citrix Endpoint Management in the past. We used it about two years ago. It was a good product. They are comparable, really, Citrix and Microsoft. 

I was not involved from the beginning of the project. However, from what I remember, we did the implementation directly with the help of a support engineer from Microsoft. Their involvement ensured the setup was not such a big deal.

Deployment took maybe one year in our environment, however, this was because we had a lot of time to tune it up and to test it, to have a pilot for a few months and then add more people to the pilot before we started migrations for mobile, for example. We took our time to really prepare the product as best as possible and then deployed it to the users and migrated them over.

We have two levels of people at a global level that handle deployment and maintenance. They mostly focus on improving the environment, not troubleshooting WiFi issues. 

We had direct assistance from Microsoft. Their assistance made the process seamless and it was a positive experience.

The solution offers reasonable pricing.

It's my understanding that we have the licensing set up for monthly payments, however, it's not an aspect of the solution I'm directly involved with. I don't know enough about it.

That said, I am aware that, in order to have mobile involved, you need the EMS solution or EMS license, and that's an extra cost to the standard Office license.

We're just a customer and an end-user.

As we are on the cloud version of the solution, we are more or less on the latest version of the solution.

The product was chosen for political reasons, as the company is mostly using Microsoft products and also the prices were maybe better than other options. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. If they are already using Microsoft or 365, it's a good product for companies sot have. 

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

We primarily use the solution for remote workforce systems that are not connected to the VPN, to flexibility deploy software, and operate system upgrades and policies, as well as pushing scripts to the devices. Pretty much just about anything that we can do in Intune, we're going to be doing. If we're not doing it already, we will be doing it.

Right now, pushing out software and policies is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The pricing and support are great. 

The dashboards, the security, and the customization capabilities work very well for us.

Everything is so tightly integrated with the on-premise solution. 

In terms of what is missing on the solution, I can't really think of anything right off the top of my head. It's doing everything we need it to do.

It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation.

In terms of some of the reporting, I find that it takes too long for some of the reports to display actual data.

We started in February using Intune on an actual production project. We had used it on a very limited basis as a testing bed several years ago, however, it wasn't a mature product back then.

The stability is great. We haven't had any issues in that regard. We don't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't freeze. It's reliable.

The scalability is very good. If you need to expand the solution, you can.

It's a management system, so every single endpoint across the enterprise has Intune connectivity. I would say 100% of our users are basically on it. We're managing all of our internal resources through Intune and the on-premise solution configuration manager. We've got upwards of 8,000 employees currently.

The support has been excellent. We're quite satisfied with the level of service provided.

The initial setup is not complex. It's relatively straightforward.

Deployment was basically a three-day engagement.

We had some assistance from Microsoft. A Microsoft engineer came on-site to assist us over the course of the deployment.

We're not paying for Intune due to the integration with Configuration Manager. If you own Configuration Manager, you own Intune and vice versa. If you own Intune, you own Configuration Manager or the on-premise solution. As far as how much Configuration Manager costs, I'm not exactly sure. We set that up a long time ago and I just do not recall the cost on that.

Our company does not have a business relationship with the vendor. We're simply customers.

We're using the very latest version of the solution. We're using it with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager, and we're running a 2006 build. With Intune, since it's the SaaS model, it's whatever version is available in the cloud.

My advice to other organizations considering the solution would be to be patient. Some of the reporting, for example, takes up to 24 hours before it is actually displayed in the console, depending on a number of endpoints you're trying to manage. 

The other recommendation would be is be prepared to switch your way of thinking around deploying policies through Intune. The policies in Intune are similar to GPOs, but there is a difference. There is a very, very distinct difference between those policies and the equivalent of the policy and the configuration as a baseline. They're similar in nature, but they're very different. You have to kind-of switch your method of thinking.

I would say I'm very, very pleased with the solution. Even with the delayed reporting, I would give it probably a solid nine out of ten.