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 most valuable features of Microsoft Entra ID are the login and the conditional access pieces."
"Overall the solution functions very well, such as the ability to access it from the cloud."
"Microsoft Azure AD is easy to install and is a stable solution."
"Single sign-on is the reason we use AD."
"It is easy to manage. I can manage systems with policies and automate our systems. Any professional system can be easily integrated with Azure Active Directory. It is widely used with Windows versions."
"Azure Active Directory has been very useful for our company, it is not difficult to use."
"The security features, such as attack surface rules and conditional access rules, are the most valuable aspects of Azure AD."
"Conditional Access, Geofencing, and Azure Multi-Factor Authentication are the major security features to secure resources."
"For the price, the features included with Microsoft are appealing."
"The solution appears to be stable and scalable."
"The ability to switch between Affinity and non-Affinity enrollment is great."
"It is quite policy-enabled, so you can build pretty much any policy to manage remote endpoints."
"Autopilot is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune."
"The ability to block and erase remote devices is valuable to us, especially when those devices are lost."
"The most valuable feature is the policy CSPs."
"Intune's unified endpoint management platform is invaluable."
"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."
"The product takes at least ten minutes to activate privilege identity management roles."
"The Cloud Provisioning Agent cannot provision a lot of the information that AD Connect does. For starters, the lightweight version cannot synchronize device information. If you have computers on-premises, the information about them will not be synchronized by the Cloud Provisioning Agent. In addition, if you have a user on the cloud and he changes his password, that information should be written back to the on-premises instance. But that workflow cannot be done with the lightweight agent. It can only be done with the more robust version."
"The ability to manage and authenticate against on-premises solutions would be beneficial."
"The pricing is okay, however, it could always be better in the future."
"The robustness of the conditional access feature of the zero trust strategy to verify users is adequate but not comprehensive."
"The licensing and support are expensive and have room for improvement."
"If Microsoft can give us a way to see where this product is running, from a backend perspective, then it would be great."
"The reports aren't complete, and it's not easy to build custom reports. For example, Windows Autopilot isn't working well in cases where the computers don't have a good internet connection. Then the option is not good enough."
"The Mac integration has room for improvement."
"There should be more focus on mobile device security and integration."
"It doesn't economize when you scale up. We have over 14,000 employees, and we have between 7,500 and 8,000 city-owned or personal devices being used to conduct city business. Its price can be improved. It is not a cheap solution."
"Microsoft needs to enhance device-level security, as sometimes when using Microsoft Intune, the device's operating system becomes stuck and requires a full uninstall to remove the Intune bug."
"Areas for improvement in Intune include expanding support beyond Samsung devices to accommodate other Android manufacturers like Redmi and Motorola."
"The add-ons must be integrated into the solution."
"Data leak prevention can be integrated into it. Currently, it does not have data leak prevention."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 4th in Microsoft Security Suite with 190 reviews while Microsoft Intune is ranked 3rd in Microsoft Security Suite with 165 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, Cisco Duo, Okta Workforce Identity and Yubico YubiKey, 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...