Microsoft Identity Manager Reviews

I have an ongoing project with my clients that encompasses research.

Hypbrid cloud is the major case, also some on Mobile Application developing.

Customer point of view, MIM work as / or together with SSO to extend the authentication, empowers orgnization agility by adopting new apps faster 

Identity 
Security 
Access Managment is the three I can think of. why? they transpass the hybrid barrier, and it's from Microsoft, fits in M365 applicaiton well

The product could be more friendly for non-native English speakers. It would also be better if it were more intuitive and visually attractive.

Microsoft Identity Manager was designed for the on-premise environment. If you want to implement a cloud-based application, so you will run into some problems, including the transport of the token from the applicant, the application side, the mobile application side through the firewall, and the transfer to the backend for authentication. That part is not quite convenient. It is very slow.

I have been using this solution for a few years. 

It is a stable product. You will experience some issues with it, but it's a good product. Identity is a complex thing, multifactor authentication is yet another, what add on this complexity is the wild Internet, if you focus enough，MIM or AAD will be you best choice. 

Microsoft Identity Manager is a scalable product. It allows for multiple users that can work together.

We use the product for identity management. It stores organizational data, including contracts we generate using Active Directory.

The product’s most valuable feature is stability.

Microsoft Identity Manager could be more intuitive in terms of interface. Also, the product’s life cycle is very short. It is going to expire soon. It becomes tough to manage projects in this case.

We have been using Microsoft Identity Manager since 2016.

It is a stable product.

It is a scalable product.

The technical support services are average. They should improve the response time.

Neutral

The initial setup is complicated. It doesn’t have a modern GUI, making the process difficult. It takes one and a half years to complete. It requires one executive for maintenance.

I rate Microsoft Identity Manager a six out of ten.

Its interface and the fact that it's integrated with everything in the Microsoft ecosystem are the most valuable features. It integrates well with the operating systems, other apps, and servers, and it's easy to see exactly who's accessing what and so on.

The prices can always be improved, and the integration with the software from other vendors could use an improvement, especially if you are using something like Oracle for a database, SAP for ERP, or something like that.

Internally, we have been using this solution for about four years. We are using its latest version.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 9 out of 10 in terms of stability.

I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager a 10 out of 10 in terms of scalability. We have around 500 users.

I'd rate their support a 9 out of 10.

Positive

We've been using the previous versions of Microsoft Identity Manager before this. It was on-premises. So, we've had it implemented for some time, and then we upgraded it to the next version. Overall, we've had it for about 10 years.

I didn't participate in its implementation.

We noticed some ROI because the people in our IT department have a lot more time to do other things instead of constantly watching the infrastructure. If something is wrong, they get a notification, and they don't have to stay up 24/7 with their eyes on what's going on with the infrastructure. There is about 15% ROI.

The prices can always be improved. I'd rate it a 4 out of 10 in terms of pricing.

I'd recommend doing a proof of concept and watching out for the prerequisites and what it needs to function properly so that you don't start an implementation and find out that you need something else, such as SQL Server for a database or an analytics space. Read the requirements carefully and start with a proof of concept to see exactly how the people from the IT department are working with this solution and whether it would help them. That's because if they are not comfortable with the solution, they will use more time to understand it than to monitor the infrastructure.

Overall, I'd rate Microsoft Identity Manager an 8 out of 10.

Our primary use case for the solution is ID provisioning. We use it to manage the entire life cycle of an employee from their entrance to exit from the organization, which includes credential management and passport management.

What makes this solution attractive is the licensing model. Microsoft Identity Manager is included in premium versions of Azure AD and in enterprise agreements such as E3. This makes the solution very attractive to many of our clients who are subscribed to those products.

The governance reporting of the solution can be improved, as it can be difficult to get good, intelligible reports.
Microsoft could implement an API of some sort to allow report customization or some form of SQL model, to further customize modules and improve the reporting. That would be a major improvement to the product.

The solution is stable. 

As long as the right infrastructure is provided the solution is scalable.
I think any organization can use it. 

From my view, Microsoft doesn't invest much in this product and it can take a while to resolve any issues. 

Neutral

The setup is not difficult, although in my experience sometimes I ran into situations where I had to deal with a number of bugs. With five being difficult and one being easy, I would rate this solution a two point five in terms of setup, configuration, and implementation difficulty. The solution requires patching or tweaking right away, and configuration requires some level of experience.

The solution is included in the Microsoft E3 license and premium subscriptions of Azure AD.

In my view, this solution is more appropriate for organizations that have legacy applications, separate identity stores, as well as an active directory.

I rate this solution a six out of ten.

I'm currently evaluating SailPoint and I'm very interested in it. I expect they have a long-term vision for identity and access governance that Microsoft doesn't have. I expect richer support and an easier approach to implementation compared to MIM.

We work with Microsoft Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, and Microsoft Services as an identity and access management system. This solution provides privileged identity management single sign-on, so we're focusing on that.

This is an all-encompassing product. The features that we find most valuable are security, mobility, and Single Sign-On.

They have to improve the User Entity and Behavioral Analysis. They have all of these features, scattered around in different components. For example, if a user logs into a computer, from that point the behavior is not completely monitored. Windows Defender is monitoring the action, but if you go into the website, the solution is not capable of understanding it. Therefore, in the case of a user browsing a malicious website, there is no way to identify it.

There should be a way to create a profile for each and every employee. For example, if an employee is searching websites for a job then the organization should be able to identify that and recognize that he's going to leave the company soon. Or, if the user is trying to access a confidential document then that identity should be tagged as a malicious user. You should be able to create metrics or risk levels for a particular user.

Generally, the security features need to be improved so that they do not have to rely on other solutions. Importantly, browser behavior should be integrated. Properties such as what department an employee is in, and what resources they access, as well as the relevant correlations, should all be determined and stored.

This is a stable product that is continuously improving.

It is scalable to any extent, so it is not an issue for this solution.

There are approximately three hundred users, which are employees. Six of them are administrators, and perhaps another ten of them are privileged users who have access to various components of the system.

I would rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

There are different service levels. For example, an enterprise customer will probably have a special service level agreement, but for SMBs, the level is different. So in that, not all customers are treated equally.

The initial setup is simple because a lot of the configuration comes from the on-premises Active Directory. It connects to various other components. If your device has to be enrolled then it is a bit complex, and you need expertise on that.

Our implementation was handled by a Microsoft partner.

I strongly recommend this solution. It encompasses the cloud, on-premises applications, mobility, and on-premises users. The modern enterprise encrypted license is one of the best solutions to go for because of the mobility and security for the workforce, as well as for the company.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use Microsoft Identity Manager to help users with different groups, closing different applications, access provision, and for de-provisioning access for different applications.

I deploy the products for my different customers as an offer for my organization. We will deploy this product with 95% of the customers that I'm working with professionally.

With Microsoft Identity Manager, most of the time the organizations actually agree that it is a primary benefit to use them. Since Identity Manager is from Microsoft, there is the assurance that it integrates alphabetically. It also works well with the server. 

Microsoft integration products are strong. That is what I like about the product.

If we compare this Microsoft Identity Manager with Okta or OneLogin, both provide multiple connectors and box connectors. Whereas with Microsoft Identity Manager, there are limits.

Instead of using the connectors from the third-party companies, they should make the Microsoft templates available with this product. If Microsoft would increase the number of the box connectors that would be helpful to all the customers who use it daily. 

Microsoft Identity Manager is good for using in production and increasing recruitment.

One to three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. 

Scalability-wise, Microsoft Identity Manager is good. It is not meant for consumers. It's meant for enterprise identity management, it is not meant for consumer identity management. 

I have implemented for 35,000 users, 40,000 users, and 16,000 users, plus another 5,000 user base. The product can scale in terms of how many users it can hold. It is a combination of multiple admin users, employees, and contractors. Even administrators are also part of Microsoft Identity Manager, but it is a very minimal number.

For deployment, one architect and two implementation consultants would be good and enough to deploy the solution in high-availability after recovery.

With all the high-availability and data recovery concerns, three people would have to be required to deploy. Whereas for the support, it just depends on the user base. If it is a minimal user base we can offer any company shares per user, but if the user base is large, then a dedicated support model is required. 

I had experience dealing with Microsoft customer support when I was working for Behold. The technical support is a little slow. They are a little slow in responding and they take their own time when offering the service. 

I'm happy but I'm not delighted with their support. 

I have deployed Microsoft for multiple customers but I haven't done the migration from One Identity Manager product to MIM. I have deployed various products. 

I haven't migrated from any other identity manager to Microsoft Identity Manager.

If we compare Microsoft Identity Manager to a cloud-based identity management solution, the initial setup is complex. 

If you compare Microsoft Identity Manager with Okta or OneLogin and the direct cloud solutions, these are all fast solutions awaiting only minimal configuration. The number of companies for which we uniquely install Microsoft Identity Manager is a little more than what we allocate fact-based IDM solutions for overall. 

Deployment depends on if the customer requires high availability and disaster recovery strategy, or the number of applications that we need to integrate.

The time that it takes to deploy the solution, integrate applications, and configure the dynamic overflow typically takes around three months. 

The deployment requires a minimum of three months and sometimes it can go up to six months. 

I work for companies who provide the services as an integrator. I work as a systems integrator.

Microsoft Identity Manager comes with the premium or community license. If the customer doesn't have a premium license, the reseller who sells the licenses of Microsoft to the enterprise can extend the license for the client.

Generally, I don't have exposure towards the final figures, but I believe Microsoft is very well in line with other products in terms of pricing.

I was evaluating OneLogin and since I don't have experience with other software, I had to recommend Microsoft Identity Manager on the basis of customer requirements.

The out of the box connectors need to be increased. We can integrate with multiple applications to connect together through using Microsoft Identity Manager.

I would grade Microsoft Identity Manager at 7 or 8 out of 10. I wouldn't give it a ten because of the lack of out of box connectors. I don't see any other drawback in the product.

The primary use case is for the single migration of the user from on-premises to Azure Active Directory in the cloud. It is also used for the Microsoft authentication application for mobile devices.

We authenticate on the smart device back to back so they can access their emails and other applications.

We are planning to use this for the Windows 10 authentication as well as directly from the Azure Active Directory.

The most valuable and most interesting feature is the conditional access. 

It can provide a low formulation combination based on the extra files that we can work on to verify the solution.

The information that is available for the Active Directory portal is segregated here and there. It's not in one single location where you can see, for example, all of the security features and maybe the customization feature.

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see the manageability, the web-based access to the portal, and the reconfiguration of things to be made simpler and more straightforward.

We have been selling this solution for the last five years.

It's stable, but it's maybe a bit more challenging than I have seen in the last five years.

This solution is scalable. We have plans to increase our usage in the future.

The number of users varies. There can be anywhere from 10,000 to maybe more than 100,000 users, who are made up of IT, administrators, managers, and architects.

We have been in touch with technical support. They are good. Normally they are available to assist and they are knowledgable.

Our previous system was based on an on-premises solution. Now, the on-premises products are integrated with the cloud, which is what made the difference.

The initial setup is straightforward and can be deployed in one week.

It was installed by my internal team.

I would say that it's the best solution on the market and I would go ahead with it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are currently using this solution, and we are also a partner. We have implemented it in different sectors for different use cases. For example, we have implemented it in the financial sector to synchronize and automate lifecycle management. We have also done deployments to only provide self-service for resetting passwords. We also have many deployments related to lifecycle management in schools and the education sector.

It is one of the easiest products to implement, which is one of the main advantages. The integration is easy. Unlike other products, it is not complicated to integrate.

It requires a lot of improvements. Microsoft is killing this product and migrating some of the features to Azure AD. The last version of this solution was 2016. If it is going to stay and integrate with Azure AD, its integration needs to be worked on in terms of connectors, etc. It doesn't seem that they are improving it alone. Microsoft wants to integrate it with Azure AD, but the integration is still not complete. 

Their support is bad, and it should be improved.

I have been using this solution since 2006, but it had a different name at that time. 

It is stable.

It is not scalable. Once you have more than 100K users, it is not scalable. It can't scale and perform at that level.

Their support is bad. I would rate them one out of five.

Its setup is straightforward.

It is easy to implement and integrate, but I would advise keeping it in the scope of only synchronization and not governance. That's because it lacks governance features.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.