Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

The scalability is quite good.

It's a very necessary product in today's technological landscape. 

I can't speak to many aspects of the solution that need improvement.

The dashboard and interface could be better. It would be ideal if it was easier to use.

I've been dealing with the solution for four years.

I have found the solution to be very stable. 

The solution is extremely scalable. 

I have had a few experiences with technical support from Microsoft. It's a very interesting support that they provide. We work closely with them, and, when we do work together, it's better.

Before choosing this solution, we did not use any other product.

The initial setup is very easy.

I handled the implementation myself. 

We are a Microsoft partner.

Overall, it's a very interesting product.

I'd rate it at 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.

Azure Active Directory is an identity and access management service.

With Azure Active Directory we were able to manage with different options the access for different users.

I have been using Azure Active Directory within the past 16 months.

The solution is stable.

The solution was difficult to scale because the group's configuration was complex.

I would rate the scalability level of Azure Active Directory a five out of ten.

We have not needed to contact support.

The implementation was easy and took approximately three hours.

We used three people to do the implementation of the solution and our analyst was in charge of the maintenance. 

The price of the solution was reasonable.

I rate Azure Active Directory a nine out of ten.

We had five people using the solution in my organization.

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.

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 use it to have better security and better control over PCs and clients.

The ability to see and control PCs and mobile devices is the most valuable. I can see where they are and how many we have. I can also see the age and retention of PCs.

The only issue with Azure AD is that it doesn't have control over the wifi network. You have to do something more to have a secure wifi network. To have it working, you need an active directory server on-premises to take care of the networks.

I have been using Microsoft products for a really long time. I have been using cloud solutions for a couple of years.

It is stable and working for us.

They don't give support to the end users in Sweden. We always have to go to a reseller, which is a bad thing.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We didn't do it ourselves. A company did it for us.

We are a non-profit organization, so we get good prices from Microsoft for their products. It is working well, but it could be cheaper. For the type of organization we are, it would be good if they could give a little bit more and be more generous like Google, which has completely free services. Microsoft has free versions or web services called Office 365 E1, which is free for use, but we want to have it with more qualified clients.

I would advise getting some help from professionals to implement it. You have to implement it in a very planned way with a very detailed roadmap.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Active Directory Premium an eight out of ten. It is quite good, and we are quite pleased with this solution.

We use Microsoft Authenticator as well as Microsoft SMS Authenticator. Normally, we enable MFA for all users who have email access and application access. Users can choose which authenticator they want to use. Based on their convenience, they enable Microsoft Authenticator or Microsoft SMS Authenticator. Almost 80% to 90% of users use Microsoft SMS Authenticator. Users who travel a lot choose Microsoft Authenticator. 

We are using the latest version. It is updated by default, and we don't have to update the application. It is also automatically updated on mobile.

It has been stable, and we haven't had any issues since we started to use it. 

Microsoft Authenticator is as easy as Google Authenticator, but it is not open to all types of applications. Google Authenticator is integrated with other third-party platforms and applications, whereas Microsoft Authenticator is not. It should have more integration with third-party platforms and applications.

I have been using this solution for the last two years.

It is stable.

We didn't have any issues or concerns. Therefore, we have never raised a ticket for Microsoft Authenticator.

The initial setup is very easy. You have to enable MFA on the portal for a user, and you have to put the user's phone number. The user can then log in with Azure ID. The user is redirected to the second level of code authenticator and receives an SMS on the mobile. The user needs to enter the OTP.

It comes free with the Microsoft account. We have a yearly agreement, and all products are covered under it.

We will keep using Microsoft Authenticator as a secondary solution. We prefer Microsoft SMS Authenticator over Microsoft Authenticator. 

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Microsoft Authenticator a nine out of ten.

Typically, we have applications deployed within the office network that we need to make accessible to our staff outside of the bank. Some of them are also our clients, but mainly, this is for people working in the region.

So without having to put them behind firewalls, what we opted to do is publish them to the proxy. This means that they can then come in via a secure port and begin to access the resources as if they were internally and securely within the network.

The most valuable feature is the ability to set up conditional access, where you can enforce users to connect using multifactor authentication. This is one of the things that we are using it for. It means that users who are accessing the applications remotely are authentic.

Technical support could be faster.

I have been using this product for three years.

This solution is stable and we plan to increase our usage.

It is a scalable product. It can be deployed in a highly available manner, where you have to have two or three connectors. We have approximately 7,000 users.

We are satisfied with the technical support from Microsoft, although it could be faster.

This product is part of our enterprise license and we did not previously use a different one.

This is a cloud service, so the initial setup is straightforward. It is not complex.

For each request, it does not take very long.

We deployed this product ourselves.

No staff is required for maintenance.

This product is sold as part of the enterprise package and our licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis. You can get it as an add-on and it's not expensive.

I have not evaluated other solutions, which makes it difficult to tell what additional features I would like to see in the future. It is sufficient and adequate for our current use case.

In our current use case, there is nothing that is lacking. This is definitely a product that I can recommend for other users.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.