Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

We had the need to integrate the solution that we had on-premise and the email-based identities, so we looked for a solution from the same provider that could establish us and provide a synchronized identity (what we know today as SSO) in our resources and thus be able to log in with the same identities we had on-premise and in the cloud. 

We wanted to take advantage of that synchronized identity quickly, simply, and safely. It was important to understand that users today want to have a single password for all resources, be they applications, or devices, in order to help them so that they are not constantly learning different credentials and can thus be faster and more efficient when establishing a single login.

It has given us the ability to be able to establish single sign-on identities in which we can establish credentials no matter where we are, whether it is on-premises or in the cloud, in a hybrid cloud, or in an additional connection from another cloud where we share equipment or host. 

Additionally, we enabled more protection functions so that it is well protected even though it is a single credential for each environment and established for any environment it could be safely protected.

Its most outstanding feature is the ability to integrate, segment, establish, add and configure an identity for multiple domains in different regions, locations, or types of clouds. It is one of the hybrid solutions that can be used the most to establish an entity configuration in multiple environments. It is a tool that has given us the ability to establish identity security issues to share and perimeter segment the security of an organization, a domain, and multiple clouds in a fast, simple, and well-established way, which has allowed us to be more efficient.

I want to see new functionalities for the active directory. I would like to be able to establish that when you log into computers locally, it is installed on a laptop and you can enable the MFA feature that is currently not available for local computers or Windows on-or off-premise - thus being one of the characteristics that can give greater added value to information security issues. 

If this feature was available on computers, it would help us in the future to avoid security breaches, information loss, or data backup vulnerabilities. In many cases, this could generate a complication. However, we always want to innovate, and the Innovation part is always to ensure that any place, device, or management that we are going to establish at the computational level is 100% secure.

We've used the solution for one year and two months.

This solution is useful for user management because it is integrated with DNS.

The solution is deployed on cloud and on-premises. We're using the latest version.

We have about 200-250 users. All of our users have local and Active Directory. We don't have plans to increase usage.

It's user friendly.

The solution could be cheaper.

We have been using this solution for about five years.

It's stable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is good.

Installation is straightforward. It only took a couple of hours to set everything up.

We pay a yearly license. Licenses are very expensive.

I use Azure Active Directory for user credential login, control my users with end-user policies, and apply my conditions.

Active Directory helps me all the time. When users want to log in, it shows me this information with a time and date. It also shows me which computer they are going to use. I can track my users at any time.

I like that you can run it on-premises. I also like that I can use Azure at any time as the main one.

ESAE management, especially the admin tools, could be improved. It should be built in by the vendor, and I shouldn't have to add patches or updates to connect to my domain directly. It should be added by default. The price could be better.

I have been dealing with this product for almost 20 years.

Azure Active Directory is a stable product. 

Azure Active Directory is a scalable product.

Customer service and support are perfect, especially when I'm dealing with my local third-party Microsoft vendor, who always supports me at any time.

Azure Active Directory is expensive.

I would recommend this solution to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Azure Active Directory a 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.

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 use Office 365. We have different licenses because our users are using mail, mail strategies, Microsoft Teams, and the Office package. We use a lot of different services. We use Microsoft Intune, which is connected to Azure and other services like Conditional Access, which we also use. Microsoft Defender is another one, which is also connected to Azure.

The solution is deployed fully in the cloud through Microsoft Azure. We are using the latest version. The solution is on cloud, so we cannot control the version we're using. That is controlled by Microsoft.

We are satisfied with this solution because we use all of its features.

Reading documentation could be simplified. Technical support could also be faster.

We have used Azure Active Directory for several years.

We haven't had any problems with stability. Everything works fine.

We haven't had any issues with scalability.

We have approximately 500 users in our organization. We have plans to increase the number of people in our company and products because we're fully integrated with Microsoft and we will continue to use this solution and new ones.

We are an IT company, so the people who are using this solution are software developers.

I'm not satisfied with technical support. On a scale of 1 to 5, I would give it a 2.

Sometimes it is the first-line support, and it takes a lot of time to explain the problem. One problem can be discussed in one month. I even have some examples in the past where I created a request, my problem wasn't resolved, I found solution on the internet. It was faster than receiving a reply from Microsoft.

Previously, we used Active Directory on-premise. We also used different products from different vendors.

We switched to Microsoft because it is in the cloud and because of business continuity. For our company, it is better to use everything on the cloud than to keep it on-premise.

It's also better to go to the cloud because of security reasons.

On a scale of 1 to 5, I would rate the difficulty of setup as a 3. It's of medium difficulty.

With setup, sometimes there are difficulties with reading documentation because if you want to implement something, you have to go to Microsoft's instructions, and you will be redirected from one page to another. After reading about just one topic, you have to open 20 new tabs. Every time, you have to jump between instructions, from one instruction to another. I don't like this approach, personally. It should be done in one document, and the instructions could be a little bit simpler for the user.

We implemented Microsoft step-by-step, because first we only used the Office package. Then we started using the Intune solution. Later, we implemented Microsoft Defender, and continued working with Conditional Access. It is not like one setup, so it's a continuous process. It depends on organization scale and the needs from organization.

We deployed the solution ourselves.

The price is fine. It's a good value for the money compared with other solutions.

I cannot provide the exact numbers because we use a different type of licensing. For Azure, we have an Office 365 license. We also have a Microsoft Gold partnership and some products are included in one license.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

The product is really good, but it's up to each company to decide.

We use this and Microsoft Intune. Azure Active Directory is an identity solution and a mandatory requirement. Without Azure Active Directory, Intune would not work.

Within Azure Active Directory, the single sign-on feature is the best aspect. Right now, the world is moving to the cloud. Nowadays, every vendor is developing their cloud. With this, I can have a single sign-on and move around from place to place easily.

The technical support is pretty good.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

I have found the solution to be stable so far.

The scalability potential is good. 

The pricing of the product is reasonable. 

The interface, in general, looks okay. 

The solution has built-in backup capabilities. 

So far, the solution has worked well for us. there are no missing features. 

The monitoring dashboard could be a bit better.

The solution is stable. the performance and reliability are good. There aren't issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

You can scale this solution if you need to. It's not a problem. 

We haven't dealt much with technical support, as we haven't really needed it, however, if we did need assistance, they have been helpful. Overall, it's been a positive experience. 

The initial setup is very, very easy. It's not complex or difficult at all.

There are multiple options for pricing. One is standalone. Another is within a package. If we consider an F1 package, I'm getting Azure Active Directory, Intune, and Microsoft Information Protection. If I'm taking the Azure Active Directory virtual feature under the plan, under the package, it's affordable. They offer a very good price.

I would rate the solution at a perfect ten out of ten overall. It's the best product. I'm really happy with it. 

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.