Microsoft Active Directory Reviews

Commonly, we engage in three key use cases. The first involves upgrading customer’s outdated directories like 2008 or 2012 to newer versions for improved structure. The second revolves around creating a hybrid setup with Office or Azure cloud, aiming for single sign-on across both. Lastly, we often tackle restructuring situations due to mergers or acquisitions, where directory structures must be unified into a shared infrastructure. These are the typical scenarios we handle in our projects.

One noteworthy aspect we discovered is the ability to exercise tight control over systems, specifically Windows PCs. This pertains to the management of policies, usage patterns, and user access on these devices, particularly within the framework of Active Directory which is extremely well thought. This actually works better with on-premises solutions. However, as the global trend shifts towards cloud and hybrid environments, Active Directory and its use is diminishing. Yet, it hasn't entirely lost its relevance and remains a presence that cannot be entirely disregarded.      

Typically, it depends on the customer's situation. If the customer operates in smaller locations where most PCs are in a common location, we usually aim to consolidate the directory infrastructure for easier maintenance. However, for distributed setups spanning multiple countries, configuring multiple sites becomes necessary and more intricate to handle. Our objective is to minimize the number of sites, simplifying operations for IT administrators and reducing errors. Mistakes in Active Directory can be costly for organizations, as disruptions can occur rapidly.

Moreover, when it comes to hybrid single sign-on across various applications, Microsoft hasn't put forth significant effort. Single sign-on has become a challenge for many customers who utilize diverse solutions beyond Microsoft products. While implementing single sign-on is relatively straightforward in the Azure cloud, it's considerably more complex when dealing with the local Active Directory. This presents a big challenge for many of our customers.

I have been working with Microsoft since 2000 and was a part of the Microsoft Active Directory Development team in Windows.

The stability and effectiveness of the setup depends on its design consideration of future growth. For instance, if a company starts with a thousand PCs but foresees expansion to ten or fifteen thousand PCs over five years, the solution should involve adding servers rather than restructuring the entire network. Unfortunately, we often find that this foresight is lacking in many cases. The initial design should be though-through with growth in mind to ensure scalability and stability.

Active Directory was an extension of the Windows NT infrastructure and wasn't designed for extreme scalability. It was intended for organizations with around five to six thousand PCs.

However, as organizations grew to more than twenty-five or thirty thousand PCs, the complexity of managing it increased significantly. Especially when managing across different countries or regions, the complexity could lead to errors, issues with patches, and other problems. For large organizations, we often suggest a hybrid solution involving Azure Directory. This way, local Active Directory is still present, but there's less dependency on it and more reliance on the cloud. Cloud solutions like Azure offer virtually limitless scalability compared to local setups constrained by server and network infrastructure.

We have a technical support team in place. In most Active Directory cases, the customers have external support from vendors. In that case, our observation is that if the initial setup is executed well and the system operates smoothly, there are fewer and simple user issues. The maintenance tasks remain minimal.

In the case of Microsoft vendor support, we have extremely poor support quality in our interactions with numerous customers. The received support has been lacking in effectiveness, largely due to the practice of assigning relatively inexperienced individuals who are learning as they go. Dealing with such a complex infrastructure as an active directory, experimenting can worsen the situation.

Neutral

Certainly, we have worked with Novell's Directory Infrastructure, which initially outperformed Microsoft's Active Directory. However, Microsoft rapidly closed the gap and swiftly gained prominence, and became one of the directories that could manage PCs

NetWare emerged as an easy-to-deploy and manage solution with good stability. The Windows NT infrastructure or Active Directory required many servers or just one server. The NT domain was less stable and based on a single server which had a lot of issues and could bring down the entire network. However, Microsoft addressed this concern in subsequent versions, effectively eliminating the problem.

When dealing with a new directory structure, the process is generally straightforward and clear. The approach depends on the organization's desired business rules. In cases of restructuring, the level of complexity varies based on the type of restructuring, whether it involves straightforward consolidation or the amalgamation of two distinct organizations. Rather than rating, the most complex scenario arises during the restructuring of directories, particularly when merging two companies or distinct structures. The complexity arises from the case to simplify and bring the rules on the same ground from each entity into a unified set suitable for the new organization. In my view, these projects have posed one of the most difficult cases.

For a fresh setup, the server infrastructure typically requires a few days or even less. The server setup is generally straightforward, but the time-consuming part lies in manually joining the PCs to the domain, as there isn't a fully automated method for it.

Active Directory is an expensive solution, primarily due to Microsoft's licensing model. This licensing approach includes paying for server licenses as well as for each computer that connects to it. However, when working with the Azure cloud, there is no cost for the server. This is profitable and one of the main reasons why Azure Cloud and other cloud-based solutions are being used more. 

There are certain scenarios where an Azure or cloud-based system might be unsuitable. For example, industries like power plants or government agencies might have restricted cloud connectivity due to regulatory or security concerns. In such cases, the utilization of Active Directory becomes the choice for managing on-premises infrastructure, as cloud isn't feasible option.

I would rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We use the solution to control environments for different servers.

The solution's most valuable feature is access control and integration with different applications.

The solution is complicated to navigate. We encounter issues while changing the settings. They should improve these particular features.

We have been using the solution for seven or eight years.

The solution is relatively stable.

It is a scalable solution. We can create multiple active directories using it.

The complexity of the solution's initial setup process depends on the environment. It takes a couple of weeks for simple setups and around a month for complicated structures.

We implement the solution with the help of our in-house team.

We have to purchase a license for the solution.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. It works well in terms of functions and regular backups of the configuration.

We use the solution for Wi-Fi and logging in students and staff on the network.

It's quite easy to integrate into other directories. It allows us to avoid creating other databases. We just replicate the SAM database into other applications requiring users to log in.

The product must provide remote password reset features. Users would want to reset their passwords wherever they are. We've never really had a simple solution where resets could be done remotely other than using third-party applications. We've had to create a third-party application for password resets.

The cloud-based solution was not so easy to deploy. The product should improve Active Directory replication into the cloud. The setup is not seamless. If we set up an AD on-prem and want to deploy it in the cloud, the synchronization setup is not very easy. The product should improve the synchronization between on-prem and cloud servers. The setup is quite complex. It would be helpful to set up a cloud server and link it to the same domain.

The active directory synchronization must be instant. It would be a great improvement if the process were automated. If I go into the cloud and set up a new Active Directory server, and link it to a specific domain, the synchronization should be the way it is on-prem. When I set up a new server on-prem and connect it to the domain, all the users move immediately.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The tool is very scalable. Around 3000 people are using the solution in our organization. It is extensively used in our organization.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment took less than two days.

We did the deployment in-house. The process to deploy comes built into the Windows Server setup. It's one of the easiest services to set up. We need a manager, a systems engineer, and two developers to deploy and maintain the product.

The license per user can probably be reduced. However, the server license is okay. The license fee is paid based on the new release of Windows Server.

We integrated the product into LDAP, which is Lightweight Directory Access Protocol. I would recommend the solution to others. It is easy to deploy the tool on-prem. Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is very easy to use. The user interface of the product is very easy to use.

Most of the features of the product are not implemented in our company because every employee is involved in their own research and development activities. Microsoft Active Directory restricts most of the features our company's employees want to use since they are involved in research and development activities. The tool should not restrict functions or features for users, and it can be considered as an area for improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Active Directory since 2013.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Every person in my company, which includes around 800 employees, uses the solution.

The tool is extensively used, and there are plans to increase the use of the solution in the future.

The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

There are people working on three or four levels in our company involved in the deployment and maintenance process, which includes a manager, a project leader, a project engineer, and a junior engineer.

The deployment process can be carried out with the help of our company's in-house team.

As per the market standard, I would want the current prices of the product to remain the same.

The solution streamlined our company's user management and authentication since it helps us to monitor user activities.

The solution's ability to support our organization's device and user access control stems from the fact that there is a need for us to manage the hierarchy in our company. My company has different hierarchies, so we have used Microsoft Active Directory to manage the hierarchy level in our organization.

I recommended the product to those who plan to use it to use the tool to monitor and analyze the use of devices and data by employees.

The solution's scalability and maintenance help grow our business environment. Since we are an organization that works five days a week, the maintenance part is taken care of on Saturdays or Sundays, which may fall on the second or fourth week of the month. My company regularly maintains and updates the product.

The benefit from the use of the product stems from the fact that it helps our company to monitor and verify the details of employees.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

We use the solution as a user repository for window servers and platforms. Also, we have Line App platforms, actively using Line Asset Align to host our account and claim access based on active directory code.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to plan and manage different policies and functionalities.

The solution's price could be better.

I have been using the solution for more than ten years.

The solution is relatively stable. There are no issues of stability right now.

The solution is easy to scale. Our entire enterprise uses it.

The solution's technical support is good if you purchase the premium service.

Positive

Microsoft Active Directory is quick and easy to install. As for the deployment, it is a matter of a few hours. It takes about one or two engineers to deploy. Also, as for maintenance, one person is enough. The patching can be configured automatically.

We purchase the license for the solution on a yearly basis. However, they have converted the licensing model into a subscription. But it is worth the money.

There are no issues in terms of the performance and configuration of the solution. It is user-friendly and has a lot of UI features. Also, they are about to deploy new AI-based features.

Microsoft offers higher licenses as well. Thus, I advise others to select the licenses that fit their company's requirements. Otherwise, they will end up paying more.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We only use Active Directory in my location for login purposes. We give permissions to file servers.

The most valuable feature is the configured appliance system in Hypervisor. We find Active Directory to be simple and effective. We mainly use it for file servers and user security. We don't utilize many advanced features.

The initial setup should be easier. It's complex and has replication and synchronization issues.

The technical support team does not give prompt responses.

I have been using the solution for the last four years.

It is a stable solution as there are no crashes or downtime. I rate it a ten out of ten. It is very good performance-wise.

It is a scalable solution. In my location, we have a total of 46 users. I rate it a ten out of ten.

The technical support team is not good as they do not provide prompt support. I rate them a five out of ten.

Neutral

Active Directory's initial setup is complex because, for some parts, like replications or synchronization, there are some problems that need to be verified. 

There is an expert-level requirement, and we are not experts. So we speak to Microsoft's support, but they are also not capable. 

Role deployments will take two to three hours. But fresh installation, if we are installing and configuring it, takes one to two hours.

Our team configured it and performed the installation and configuration.

The pricing model differs for India and other countries. Our procurement was based in India for a Microsoft license. The branch in our location is responsible for providing us with the software and licenses. They have an IT team that takes care of all the software-related matters.

Since we started to use it and configured it with our server, we haven't experienced any downtime, instability, or crashes. I have had a good experience with this solution and with Microsoft.

I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I use Microsoft Active Directory as the first line in the LDAP directory. You can use the solution to manage computer accounts, user accounts, and other objects. You can also use Microsoft Active Directory to build roles and permissions.

The solution is widely used in Microsoft environments, where you use computers with the Microsoft OS. The solution is easy to install and has good reliability. With Microsoft Active Directory, you won't have any problems if one of the domain controllers is damaged. The tools you use to maintain and manage Microsoft Active Directory are not complicated.

The solution could be made more safe by using authentication mechanisms. We often have to deal with security issues.

I have been using Microsoft Active Directory for 20 years.

The solution has some bugs, but from my point of view, they are not really important.

More than 1,00,000 users are using the solution in our organization.

Microsoft Active Directory is not an expensive solution. You have to buy the Windows OS licenses, but you don't have to pay any additional product licenses for Active Directory.

You have to build an environment after considering all your requirements. It is really important to consider your organizational structure and the possibilities of the tools you use to authenticate against Active Directory. Microsoft Active Directory is so easy to install. You can promote the domain controller and then have an Active Directory.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Active Directory can be useful as an identity provider and management solution. It helps network managers with the entire user lifecycle, from creation to termination. This includes the provisioning process, the accounting process, and the authorization process. By centralizing user management, Active Directory can help improve security.

Active Directory plays a focal point in security management, encompassing aspects like credential management, lifecycle, dynamic provisioning, and the network infrastructure of customers.

Our work pertains to security applications, not system management. In essence, it's about Microsoft's Active Directory, not Microsoft System. We are all collectively interested in its potential.

I like the integration with the Microsoft suite of products. This makes it easy to create a unified and centrally managed network.

I would like to see more integration with cloud-based applications. This would make it easier to manage users and devices across multiple platforms.

I have been using Active Directory for more than ten years. We consistently upgrade our server system to incorporate the new version, ensuring that we operate with the most recent release.

It is a stable solution.

There were no problems with scalability. We could manage networks of hundreds and thousands of users. 

Everyone in our organization is using this solution. We use this solution regularly. 

The support is quite good, but usually, we don't need to reach out to Microsoft's support directly because most issues can be resolved through our integrator. It's one of the standout aspects of this solution in the world. We easily find the solutions. 

The setup is not as straightforward as I would like it to be. It was a lot more complex to configure the console in Active Directory. 

The deployment process depends on the features you want to implement and the size of the network. In general, it can take a few days to a few weeks to deploy Active Directory.

We deploy and manage Active Directory in-house, but we do use a system integrator for some specific tasks, such as designing the Active Directory infrastructure.  While we provide recommendations and implement certain functionalities, our customers are responsible for direct management, sometimes with the support of an integrator for tasks beyond their expertise. 

To activate the Active Directory feature, you need to establish a controlled system. This involves creating a forest and distinguishing between various active directory instances and different forests. 

Additionally, user insertion is essential, along with segmenting users and resources into distinct groups. Configuration is necessary for each parameter, from account metering to endpoint management. Ultimately, consolidation must be achieved. This process is complex and time-consuming.

Therefore, the number of people required for maintenance and deployment depends on the complexity and the size. It requires us to map out the architecture accurately. The infrastructure includes both managerial and technical roles.

It's not overly expensive. It's considered a base function by Microsoft. We're required to pay for the license, which is based on the frequency of service usage. It's on a yearly basis.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

I suggest managing security aspects since it serves as a focal point for managing credentials and financial operations. A keen focus is essential.