Ping Identity Platform Reviews

I am a reseller for PingID.

This is a user-friendly solution.

I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved.

I have been using PingID as an end user for about four years.

This is a stable solution.

This is a scalable solution.

I have not needed to contact support yet.

Ping is a suitable on-premise Active Directory in the IT environment.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for access to cloud applications.

The support for multi-factor authentication from different sources is the solution's most valuable feature.

The solution should allow for better integration with other platforms and the UBT.

The solution needs to offer stronger support for the password-less authentication.

I've been using the solution for less than a year.

The solution is stable. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches.

The scalability is good. It's been able to provide us with enough scalability for our needs. We have about 100 users on the solution currently. 

We've been in touch with technical support and have been satisfied with their services so far.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Our team handled the deployment internally.

We pay a licensing fee to Ping on a yearly basis. We don't have to pay an extra fee for technical support.

Before choosing Ping, we evaluated Okta.

We use a hybrid deployment model and are using the latest version of Ping.

It's being used quite extensively in our organization, although I'm unsure as to if we have plans to increase usage.

If someone is looking for a solution that works both for on-prem or hybrid, I strongly recommend opting for the cloud. It's a simple implementation and the solution is quite interesting. There are a lot of integrations. The on-prem is not very easy to implement in comparison to the cloud but it's very good, and, for organizations with on-premise requirements, it's bound to be one of the top choices.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

The auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications. 

The legacy applications remain an issue. There also is a tendency for downtime and network issues. Also, it has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution.

It is a straightforward setup, but we did have some debugging issues. 

I am a consultant and this is one of the solutions that I implement for my clients.

It is used for the federation integration of the whole organization.

The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication.

Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported.

There are challenges when it comes to setting up this solution for external IP usage.

I have been using PingFederate for about a year.

It is a stable solution.

PingFederate is scalable. My customers are enterprise-level organizations with more than 1,000 users.

Technical support for PingFederate is fine.

I have experience with Keycloak, which I find to be a comparable solution. I think that the big difference between them is the multifactor aspect.

The initial setup is ok. I would say that it is manageable.

PingFederate is a good product but there are limitations. It is a good solution especially if it's an internal IP usage customer. For external customers, they do have challenges, although there are solutions for that available, as well.

Overall, it is a good product with some integration limitations.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.