We compared Microsoft Intune and Microsoft Entra ID based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Microsoft Intune and Microsoft Entra ID both offer valuable features such as efficient device management and seamless authentication processes. Intune focuses on security measures and integration with enterprise systems, while Entra ID emphasizes user-friendly interfaces and platform integration. Users praise Intune for its prompt customer service and cost-effectiveness, while Entra ID users appreciate its affordability and efficiency. However, Intune users suggest improvements in user interface and performance, while Entra ID users seek enhancements in UI design and customization options.
Features: Microsoft Intune and Microsoft Entra ID have different valuable features. Intune offers data wipe and device reset, integration with enterprise systems, and control over user access. Entra ID focuses on user-friendly interface, efficient authentication, and seamless integration with platforms.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Microsoft Intune is praised for its reasonable pricing and cost-effectiveness. Users find the licensing options to be flexible and accommodating. On the other hand, users have expressed a positive sentiment towards Microsoft Entra ID's pricing, setup cost, and licensing. They appreciate the affordability, competitive pricing, and user-friendly setup process. The licensing options are also seen as flexible and suitable for various needs and budgets., The ROI from Microsoft Intune demonstrated effective cost management, increased productivity, secure device management, streamlined workflows, seamless integration, time savings, enhanced user experience, and improved security measures. On the other hand, Microsoft Entra ID offers significant cost savings, improved efficiency, streamlined business processes, and increased productivity.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Intune could improve its user interface, speed, customization options, and troubleshooting features. On the other hand, Microsoft Entra ID needs enhancements in its user interface, optimization for different devices, usability, sign-up process, customization options, and security features.
Deployment and customer support: The users' reviews for Microsoft Intune indicate that the duration to establish the tech solution can vary, with some users reporting separate phases of deployment and setup, while others consider both terms to refer to the same period. On the other hand, Microsoft Entra ID user reviews also show variability in the duration required, with some users reporting distinct deployment and setup phases, and others considering them as one., The customer service provided by Microsoft Intune is highly praised for its prompt assistance and knowledgeable support staff. Customers value feeling supported throughout their interactions. In comparison, Microsoft Entra ID's customer service is highlighted for its exceptional efficiency, reliability, and helpfulness. The support team is praised for their friendliness, professionalism, and effective communication, ensuring seamless problem resolution.
The summary above is based on 193 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Intune and Microsoft Entra ID users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The tool's most valuable feature is conditional access."
"The way the laptops are joined is valuable. We can take advantage of that in terms of being able to log in and do things. It is easier to change passwords or set things up."
"Azure AD has features that have helped improve our security posture."
"The visibility and control for permission management are excellent."
"The initial setup was very straightforward."
"It has made our work easier in that it’s simplified everything for us."
"Technical support has been great."
"The solution scales well."
"This product works very well for companies already using the full Microsoft suite."
"Autopilot is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune."
"One of the best features is Windows Autopilot because if you change any of your devices, whatever security policies and compliance policies that applied can be easily migrated to the new devices. Windows Autopilot gives you that flexibility."
"Maturity makes it a stable product."
"It's easy to manage and easy to configure."
"The solution is stable."
"There is a single pane of glass for user access and a single sign-on facility for the user. If you have already logged in to Microsoft Azure or on-premises, you can redirect directly to Microsoft Endpoint Manager, monitor all your security threats, and analyze the data associated with the application in a single, unified way."
"If the product works, remote access will be a benefit. To this point we have not had reason to have confidence in achieving that access."
"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."
"The product takes at least ten minutes to activate privilege identity management roles."
"I would rate it an eight out of ten. The price plays a factor in the rating."
"My problem with Azure AD is that it's designed for medium to large systems, and we're not that large."
"The robustness of the conditional access feature of the zero trust strategy to verify users is adequate but not comprehensive."
"Azure AD needs to be more in sync. The synchronization can be time-consuming."
"There is no documentation about how Microsoft will scale Azure AD for customers. It only mentions that it will scale out if you have a lot of requests but does not mention how in detail."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It's just okay."
"Lacking in features such as Wi-Fi and network security."
"There is room for improvement in integration and security as well."
"More integration with monitoring tools is needed."
"Onboarding of endpoint devices is not straightforward. The onboarding process was a little heavier than I thought it would be. That's the key improvement area. Obviously, the more control you have over the devices, the better it is."
"There is room for improvement in integrating additional features such as Purview and SharePoint activities into Intune."
"Reporting could be improved. It needs to be more expensive and robust."
"Intune doesn't provide much control over Windows servers. It's something we struggle with."
"It should be easier to define policies and comply with those policies."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 4th in Microsoft Security Suite with 190 reviews while Microsoft Intune is ranked 3rd in Microsoft Security Suite with 164 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Intune is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Intune writes "We can manage all aspects of our devices from a single console, easy to scale, and quick to deploy". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey, Cisco Duo and Auth0, whereas Microsoft Intune is most compared with Jamf Pro, VMware Workspace ONE, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, SOTI MobiControl and IBM MaaS360. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. Microsoft Intune report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
In recent years Microsoft has really upped its game with Defender and Intune. As core cyber-security for an SME, keeping just to Microsoft is now a real option. The challenge is understanding the gaps / cyber security service weaknesses (if they exist) in comparison with other vendors such as ESET, Malwarebytes, Trend Micro, etc.
Azure AD Services, Defender for Endpoint, and Intune are all Microsoft products, but it is important to understand how each product works as they may not be compatible and there may be some limitations.
Devices managed through Intune may not have all of the Defender for Endpoint features. Some advanced features such as automated investigation and remediation may only be available for devices that are enrolled in Defender for Endpoint standalone.
In addition, Azure AD and Intune have different requirements for device enrollment and management. Intune requires devices to be enrolled and managed through an MDM solution, while Azure AD provides basic device management capabilities but may not support all of the features available in Intune.
Lastly, there may be limitations to how user identities and access are managed between Azure AD and Intune. Some features that are available in Azure AD, such as conditional access policies, may not suit Intune, and additional configuration may be required to ensure that user identities and access are properly managed across both services.
If anyone out there has other experiences, please let me know!
It depends on your company's infrastructure. Check with your cyber team whether you can sync your endpoints to Cloud using Azure AD as Azure Registered/ Azure Hybrid AD join/ Azure AD join, etc.
1. So, if the ask is only to enroll them in Intune to leverage defender/BitLocker services - go directly to Azure AD's join approach.
2. If you still want to manage patch management/mcm BitLocker but Defender via cloud, the approach should be Azure Hybrid AD join.
3. You can still use autopilot using both of these approaches.
I believe it is a good first step, and I would say even a requirement, but in no way is it a comprehensive security solution, even for endpoints.
There are many things that need to be addressed for security. In addition to this, there is XDR, MDR, more comprehensive AV for endpoints & Servers that stop attacks, Threat Hunting, Mitigation, PEN Testing, Security Training for end users, Multi-Factor Authentication (Microsoft's MFA is good but only for Microsoft products), Patch Management for Endpoints, Servers and Cloud Workloads, Network Access Control, Firewalls for On-Premise and Cloud server workloads, Network Segmentation, Password Management, Data Backups (3-2-1-1 Rule) with Immutable Backups, Power Backups, Physical Security, Monitoring, NOC/SOC services, and working towards a Zero Trust architecture...
But there are no single-point solutions that will make you secure, so don't get complacent. And you can outspend your profits if you do everything. Just remember it's best to have a layered approach that works together and looks at everything from a security perspective and how it integrates with your overall security plans and objectives to help identify holes and possible mitigations.
Healthcare must do Risk Assessments by law, but I recommend that all companies of all sizes do at least annual risk assessments since there is so such thing as being too small or inconspicuous to be hit with malware or have a cyber security attack since much of the delivery is automated and not just by the script-kiddies of years gone by... Nation States are actively engaging in cyber warfare daily, along with terrorists, and opportunists looking to make big money from you...