We performed a comparison between erwin Data Intelligence by Quest and Microsoft Purview Data Governance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Governance solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Data Intelligence creates a single source of truth for all of our metadata. This solution is better for data warehousing, but the metadata features speed up our development work. It's easy to create and manage mappings because we can export them to Informatica and pick up the work where we left off."
"Data Intelligence has provided more profound insights into legacy data movements, lineages, and definitions in the short term. We have linked three critical layers of data, providing us with an end-to-end lineage at the column level."
"The solution saves time in data discovery and understanding our entire organization's data."
"The biggest impact for us is that erwin generates DDL extremely quickly. We're able to pull in metadata, map it to a target, generate DDL to create the tables, and generate SSIS packages. Previously, especially going back 10 to 15 years ago, hundreds of hours had to be spent to manually perform these tasks. This solution completely automates it and gets it 90% done. We can then pass it off to a developer to create the items in SSIS."
"They have just the most marvelous reports called mind maps, where whatever you are focused on sits in the middle. They have this wonderful graphic spiderweb that spreads out from there where you can see this thing mapped to other logical bits or physical bits and who's the steward of it. It's very cool and available to your business teams through a portal."
"We always know where our data is, and anybody can look that up, whether they're a business person who doesn't know anything about Informatica, or a developer who knows everything about creating data movement jobs in Informatica, but who does not understand the business terminology or the data that is being used in the tool."
"We use the codeset mapping quite a bit to match value pairs to use within the conversion as well. Those value pair mappings come in quite handy and are utilized quite extensively. They then feed into the automation of the source data extraction, like the source data mapping of the source data extraction, the code development, forward engineering using the ODI connector for the forward automation."
"The data management is, obviously, key in understanding where the data is and what the data is. And the governance can be done at multiple levels. You have the governance of the code sets versus the governance of the business terms and the definitions of those business terms. You have the governance of the business data models and how those business data models are driving the physical implementation of the actual databases. And, of course, you have the governance of the mapping to make sure that source-to-target mapping is done and is being shared across the company."
"Their data labeling or data classification is particularly valuable because we want to categorize all of our data into confidential, public, or internal."
"The most valuable feature is the tracking activity and device onboarding."
"The product has helped us save both time and money."
"It is very easy to learn the interface, and it is very user-friendly."
"The time to onboard is pretty short."
"One of the best features is the classification rules, especially the scan rule sets. They are really useful, especially when we need to understand the current data the company has to ensure that all the problematic data can be put under someone's responsibility."
"Microsoft Purview is scalable."
"The audit log has been a lifesaver for a lot of reasons. Historically, when using SaaS products, there were always questions about how the audit was going and whether we were sufficient out of the box. Purview has many capabilities available through centralized reporting that provide a view of a specific segment."
"There is room for improvement with the data cataloging capability. Right now, there is a list of a lot of sources that they can catalog, or they can create metadata upon, but if they can add more then that would be a good plus for this tool."
"Another area where it can improve is by having BB-Graph-type databases where relationship discovery and relationship identification are much easier."
"The fact that I sometimes have to go in and out of different applications, even though it's all part of the whole erwin suite, perhaps means it could be architected a little bit better. I think they do have some ideas for improvements there."
"One big improvement we would like to see would be the workflow integration of codeset mapping with the erwin source to target mapping. That's a bit clunky for us. The two often seem to be in conflict with one another. Codeset mappings that are used within the source to target mappings are difficult to manage because they get locked."
"There may be some opportunities for improvement in terms of the user interface to make it a little bit more intuitive. They have made some good progress. Originally, when we started, we were on version 9 or 10. Over the last couple of releases, I've seen some improvements that they have made, but there might be a few other additional areas in UI where they can make some enhancements."
"We still need another layer of data quality assessments on the source to see if it is sending us the wrong data or if there are some issues with the source data. For those things, we need a rule-based data quality assessment or scoring where we can assess tools or other technology stacks. We need to be able to leverage where the business comes in, defining some business rules and have the ability to execute those rules, then score the data quality of all those attributes. Data quality is definitely not what we are leveraging from this tool, as of today."
"The technical support could be improved."
"The solution's Arabic language processing is limited. The results are limited when you use the interface in Arabic."
"There are differences when looking at an incident in the M365 portal versus Purview, and the main one is the advanced hunting. In the M365 portal, you can write KQL queries and fetch data. If that was available in Purview, it would be very good."
"Overcoming certain control issues would significantly enhance our overall satisfaction."
"There are negatives to the compliance aspect of Purview in that you get a lot of false positives with some of the native scanning and rules in the platform. A lot of them need tweaking to get a more realistic handle on what data there is."
"We have had some issues automating our document management with Power Apps. I haven't been super-disappointed with anything except for Power Apps, which kinda drives me nuts. I think it's because I am a coder who can do things properly, and I keep trying to do things there, but it's not working out the way. The security team is pretty quick. I'm kind of a thorn in their side. I always try to get around stuff. They haven't come to me for anything saying, "Hey, I can't find this information." They're pretty good. Maybe, there's a lack of documentation, but that doesn't seem to be an issue for our team."
"I have some concerns about the separation of roles in Purview from the Microsoft tenant, as well as how they interact with the security portal and endpoint manager."
"Running eDiscovery once a day takes quite a long time because it has to fetch your data. I also want the eDiscovery results to be improved. At the same time, I would like to get a centralized page where I could see records management applied to my Office 365 tenant visualized instead of waiting for a custom script to run through the complete tenant."
"Although you can explore the data, that creates a great interest in data lineage or the data flow. How does it go from a source to a platform to a Power BI report, for example? It is possible, to some extent, to see that with Purview, but the lineage feature requires some manual work on the development side or more work from Microsoft to improve on it."
"We've had a few issues with the scanner. It runs perfectly one day, and on another day, it will run the whole night. It's probably related to the rules. If I set some compliance rules and apply the rules to any column, I can't delete it. I have to disable it and reactivate it."
More erwin Data Intelligence by Quest Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Purview Data Governance Pricing and Cost Advice →
erwin Data Intelligence by Quest is ranked 4th in Data Governance with 18 reviews while Microsoft Purview Data Governance is ranked 1st in Data Governance with 48 reviews. erwin Data Intelligence by Quest is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Purview Data Governance is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of erwin Data Intelligence by Quest writes "Enabled us to centralize a tremendous amount of data into a common standard, and uniform reporting has decreased report requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Purview Data Governance writes "User friendly with good documentation but needs to cover more non-Microsoft use cases". erwin Data Intelligence by Quest is most compared with Collibra Governance, Alation Data Catalog, Informatica Axon, Collibra Lineage and AtScale Adaptive Analytics (A3), whereas Microsoft Purview Data Governance is most compared with Collibra Governance, Alation Data Catalog, Varonis Platform, Informatica Axon and IBM Data Governance. See our Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs. erwin Data Intelligence by Quest report.
See our list of best Data Governance vendors.
We monitor all Data Governance 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.
