Microsoft Entra ID Reviews

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.

I am using this product for user authentication.

I think the documentation and configuration are both areas that need improvement. 

The product changes and gets updated, but the documentation doesn't keep pace.

The initial setup could be simplified.

I would like to see a better UI tool.

The company has been using this solution for approximately four years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution. We have not experienced any issues.

Microsoft Azure Active Directory Premium is a scalable solution. It scales very well.

We all use this solution daily. We are a team of five the company.

The most valuable feature is the ease of scalability.

The initial setup is fairly complex.

We are a smaller company and it only took us two days to deploy.

We did not use an integrator, we used in-house knowledge.

If you are familiar with Microsoft, this is the product to use.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Active Directory Premium an eight out of ten.

We just use the solution for the authentication and the provision access control, among other tasks.

The access control aspect of the authentication is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The single sign-on is very convenient for us.

It would be ideal if the solution moved to a passwordless type of environment. It's the future of authentification. It's also more secure and convenient.

I've been using the solution for about a year.

The solution is quite stable. I haven't heard any bad things about it. It doesn't crash or freeze. I can't say that I've seen bugs or glitches. It seems to be very reliable so far.

I believe the solution is scalable, although I have not tried to scale it myself personally.

We have many people on the system, including doctors, nurses, practitioners, assistants, etc. It might be around 100 people, give or take.

I've never dealt with technical support for any reason. I wouldn't be able to evaluate their services or discuss their level of responsiveness.

I didn't handle any aspect of the implementation, as I'm not technical in any way. I wouldn't be able to specify if it was complex or straightforward or how the deployment went.

I don't have any insights into the licensing costs. I'm not a part of the accounting or payment process.

Our organizations has a few partnerships with Microsoft.

I don't know which version of the solution we're using. It's most likely the latest, due to the fact that it's a cloud deployment.

The only advice I have for other organizations considering the solution is this: just make sure that you have the right requirements. It's never a carbon copy. Every environment has different needs and requirements.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

This product manages access for our compute space that includes Office 365, Salesforce, and other solutions.

The most valuable features are the B2B connector and the external identity connection functionality. These are helpful.

User group management works well.

The interface is well laid out and it is easy to navigate. You can get to things quickly and it works.

The portal allows you to create reports, which is a nice feature.

My only pain point in this solution is creating group membership for devices. This is something that could be improved. Essentially, I want to be able to create collection groups, or organizational units and include devices in there. I should be able to add them in the same way that we can add users.

We want to be able to create members as devices in groups, without having to leverage a dynamic group membership with queries. I want to be able to just pick machines, create a group, and add them.

We have been using Active Directory Premium for four years.

This is a stable product.

I have only used technical support on one occasion and I found it to be pretty good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I have not used this product to its full extent but from what I have used, I find that it works well.

My advice for anybody who is implementing AD Premium is to understand what it is that they're going to use and how they're going to manage identity. I suggest doing a lot more in terms of identity governance.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a software development company and solution provider, and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

This is an easy way to give users access to applications. I can share access with other organizations outside of our network.

This solution is easy to manage.

The ability to grant access to other organizations is helpful.

It integrates well with a large number of applications.

Microsoft needs to add a single setup, so whenever resources join the company or are leaving the company, all of the changes can be made with a single click.

I would like to see a secure, on-premises gateway that offers connectivity between the physical servers and the cloud. The capability already exists, but it is not secure enough when the setting is marked private.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Active Directory Premium for about a year.

In the time that I have been using Microsoft Azure, I haven't had any problem with stability.

This is the right platform if you are looking for scalability. We have more than 100,000 users.

We have not needed to use technical support. 

We have a couple of contacts in the Microsoft team, so we will reach out to them in case we have any questions.

I have recently been working with Okta, and I find that most organizations are moving toward it. With this in mind, I think that Microsoft has to take care, and consider why so many people are switching. The most important reason is the single setup. Once they set up Okta, it's easy for the organization.

I have been working in Microsoft Azure for a long time and I find the initial setup to be easy.

For maintenance, we have a team of 20 administrators and developers.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis and the cost depends on the number of users. There are no charges in addition to this.

The suitability of this solution depends on the technology and the environment at the organization. Many companies are still transitioning to the cloud, leaving part or all of their data on-premises. Ultimately, it depends on the data that they have and their preference or requirements for keeping it on-premises. In some cases, people want to move only non-private data to the cloud. All of these things have to be considered before implementing Azure Active Directory.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.