Microsoft Purview Data Governance Reviews

Our IT team, data engineering team, and data science team all rely on Microsoft Purview for a unified data repository. We maintain a table for storing sensitive data with segregated access. To readily understand the data types within, anyone can simply leverage Microsoft Purview's classification system. By selecting a specific classification, users gain access to relevant table details.

If we create keys for non-Microsoft data sources, we can leverage Purview's data connector platform to connect and ingest the data.

It is good that Purview takes into account critical regulations from around the world.

Microsoft Purview has greatly improved our organization's ability to view and share permissions with minimal human intervention. Searching for desired information is now a breeze. However, integrating permissions for access in large environments can be a stumbling block. With ten departments, granting access to a single table for one department is straightforward. But when access to multiple tables is required, they must go through the main administrator for verification.

Microsoft Purview shows us compliance in real-time.

Data segregation is the most valuable feature. This provides clear visibility into the hierarchy of data flow, including its destinations, loading points, and table updates.

While Microsoft Purview offers data protection across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments, granting access in such complex settings can be lengthy and expensive.

Every scan we perform incurs a charge, making exploration quite costly.

I would like to have complete video documentation for training.

I have been using Microsoft Purview for six months.

In my experience with Microsoft Purview for our data governance project, I'd rate its stability at a seven out of ten. While it excels during exploration phases with use cases and demos, we encountered some challenges during implementation.

Each time we contact Microsoft support, the support person seems new and has to look into the issue because they've never encountered it before.

Neutral

Deploying initially is simple. It only takes as long as creating a storage account in the Azure portal, which is quick.

Microsoft Purview is expensive.

I would rate Microsoft Purview a seven out of ten.

Our current clients are medium-sized businesses.

In the six months we have been using Microsoft Purview it has not required any maintenance.

I'm a cloud consultant and prefer Azure Purview as a governance tool. A few of my clients are in the banking sector, including global and Indian banks. They need a centralized solution for compliance and governance. 

I haven't used Purview much for SaaS or device management, but I have explored the SaaS services and PaaS in terms of other tools that can be integrated with Azure Purview. Our clients often have an ETL solution that's in Azure directly. Most of our clients use Synapse Analytics or Databricks. One of our energy clients in Australia has the same use case for data platform implementation. They have some unstructured data on-premises, and it goes back to the Azure storage account as raw data. They do some transformation with the help of an ETL tool. For agentless forecasting, they do model training with the help of Databricks or Azure machine learning. They'll use Power BI for visualization, but Purview is the centralized governance tool.

Purview improves compliance and governance with data source and auto-scanning features. All those data assets would be in a centralized repo that pulls from different sources and databases that hold the bank data or the customer's data. The solution enhances compliance in terms of security factors and issues like duplication. It scans for new data coming in and older data that already exists. Purview collects the metadata to get a clearer visualization of all the compliance aspects. 

Another benefit is accelerated migration. Purview facilitates smooth migrations by giving clients insights into their data, which data is useful, and what kind of data is non-compliant, so you can classify data based on compliance, priority, and utility. It helps clients decide which data is essential and should be migrated. Identifying non-compliant data can help clients improve security and privacy.

Data analysis and classification isn't a two-day or two-week job. It's a long-term process. It might take two or three months to gather feedback on what kind of data is the most beneficial, like structural data, static data, etc. The data lineage doesn't come in one or two days. It takes some time to get a complete picture of your source and destination and the data cycle from start to finish. You can say that the data was in this phase six months ago, and now it is in this phase. Six months is enough to get a clear picture of the data flow and the kinds of data that are most beneficial.  Purview is helpful for long-term data management and classification.

Purview improves visibility. If I go back to a year ago, when I was learning Purview, my perspective was different. There were fewer features, and Purview has grown at a rapid pace. I was originally a network engineer, but I am now a cloud consultant, so it was challenging to work with the Azure version initially. I started seeing the benefits of its data classification features once I started consulting, seeing everything that comes into a client's bucket, and receiving feedback. Now, I can see the solution's strengths in governance and compliance.

The auto-scanning functionality and automation features in Azure have a positive impact when connecting data sources. When there are multiple data sources, we can make connections and start discovery. Manual discovery will take so long, and we don't know when the new data is coming in, so automation is useful. When new data comes into the databases, Purview triggers that auto-discovery part so the data stays updated. It's more efficient and more accurate.

For example, we have let's say we have data coming in this month. We have a discovery scan, and some new data comes into the databases after a day or two. If we don't run the auto-scanning feature, the data will get outdated. It would affect if we need to present something or calculate something. We can discover data quickly and get accurate data. It isn't completely in real-time. It still takes time to refresh things, but we haven't 

Automated discovery reduces the amount of time needed to take action on insider threats. If discovery is already done, it's easier to classify the data and import it into a data visualization tool like Power BI. We need to complete the discovery before moving on to the data lineage component or the Data Factory pipeline. It reduces the time by about 12 to 15 percent.

My favorite Purview feature is auto-scanning. Once we set up Purview, we can automatically scan multiple data sources when new data comes into specific databases, like SQL and Oracle. We don't need to rediscover the new data or do anything manually because it automatically happens.

Purview also offers some additional integration capabilities if you use the Azure edition. We can seamlessly integrate tools like Azure Data Factory and Synapse Analytics to provide analytics and data transformation services in a customer's ETL pipeline. Organizations want to structure that data, so they use a basic ETL tool, which is commonly Azure Data Factory. Purview provides us with all the connectors needed to integrate these data tools. Another feature I like is data lineage. Purview tracks the data from its source to the destination. 

I haven't seen many challenges with integrating or supporting native Microsoft solutions like Office 365. We haven't come across anything in Microsoft 365 that's unsupported out of compliance with HIPAA regulations in the health sector or banking and finance regulations. It conforms to PCI DSS compliance methodology or GDPR.

We have multiple clients in the energy and banking sectors. Purview is vital in data platform implementation projects involving ETL transformations and model training. It's our default tool for governance when we're pitching our organization during presales. However, our smaller customers often don't need that much governance, or they're good with Azure Monitor. They may also prefer some other governance tool or might have an on-premise tool that they are already using. They don't want to change it despite the integration and features. Our big customers may have existing governance tools, but they want to use Purview because it offers additional features. It provides them security, compliance, and the flexibility to integrate with third-party and Azure native tools. 

Two features are unsupported—custom insights and the DLP component—that would be beneficial to me as a consultant and for the customer in terms of security and monitoring. Regarding security, DLP would provide a more granular level of data masking. Custom insights would offer more detailed monitoring and alerts that can notify customers of failures or anything requiring urgent action. 

DLP is not a part of Purview. Our larger customers require some advanced features, such as dynamic data masking, encryption, and decryption. For example, some of our projects in Dubai involve machine learning use cases and encrypted critical data on-premise. It varies. Data encryption and masking are not priorities for some customers.  

Microsoft has some built-in data masking tools. Some customers believe that masked data is safe, and they don't want to move it. We tell the clients that Purview doesn't move the actual data, only the metadata. The customer is convinced that DLP is not part of Purview, but that is not a concern because it's all about metadata. The original data is not transferred from on-premise to Azure. Purview is not storing the actual data. It takes the data to perform discovery and provide better data classifications. If DLP is added, then Purview will be stronger.

When I talk to clients about these DLP features, they say it still lags behind in data integration and support. It does not affect the sales side or prevent us as consultants from convincing them to switch because of these two unsupported features. However, Purview does need some improvements in data security and third-party integrations.

I have worked with Purview for a year. 

I rate Purview six out of 10 for stability. It is stable, but they're constantly adding new features, so it needs more stability in the future. 

Purview is a scalable solution because Microsoft manages everything on the back end. We don't need to handle any databases or servers. We can talk about the general scalability of Azure services, not Purview specifically. The SLA gives an uptime of 99.99 percent. I have not had any scalability issues with Azure services, and this goes for Purview as well.

I rate Microsoft support seven out of 10. They respond quickly and follow up fast after the issue has been closed to see if the problem is resolved. 

Neutral

I have not used GCP, but the AWS centralized governance tool lags in terms of authentication and authorization. AWS also has features like data lineage it can provide. However, Purview stands out for security protections and role-based access control. Purview offers better granularity compared to the AWS or GCP governance tools. The access control list enables granular levels of access to its users. 

Deploying Purview isn't too complex. The initial installation takes about eight hours. Setting up a data governance solution involves configuring the networking components. The networking part can be done in parallel with deploying other services. However, you must completely implement the data platform before connecting the data sources and performing data discovery. Later, you can begin the data analysis and classification on Purview. 

The data deployment and networking configuration is similar to deploying other Azure services. I imagine on-prem Purview requires more time to set up. If we are giving a client an estimate of the time it would take to complete the project, the deployment and networking part would not additional time. However, the data discovery, classification, lineage, and data source connectivity, require two more weeks. The total deployment takes five to eight weeks plus an additional two weeks for the discovery phase.

The networking engineer who deployed Databricks, Azure Data Factory, Synapse Analytics, etc. can easily deploy Purview because it's the same. However, we require a dedicated Purview engineer for the discovery phase. We haven't had to do much maintenance so far. 

Microsoft Purview is priced in the middle. It isn't the cheapest, but it isn't the most expensive. It's affordable compared to other public cloud services. Purview costs about 20 percent less than AWS, but it is still expensive compared to other Azure services and governance tools. 

I rate Microsoft Purview seven out of 10. I recommend Purview over other governance features because it has multiple features that make it stand out from the rest. Once it is updated with features like DLP and custom insights, Purview will be a market leader. These additional features will help the solution earn more enterprise-scale customers. 

Microsoft recently changed the name of this solution. It was previously called Microsoft Compliance Center. Purview has multiple functions, but I primarily use it for records management. I also use the Audit Center for getting audit details about various aspects of the Microsoft 365 platform.

Purview protects against litigation by meeting our compliance requirements and helping us manage the reports. You can realize the benefits once it's set up correctly. Every day, you'll get new audits and inputs from the tool and access the data quite easily. 

The organization didn't have any solution in the first place, so that's a huge challenge. From the perspective of Indian compliance use cases, we see a lot of benefits from Purview's storage. 

This custom solution gives you more power compared to what it used to. Previously, all the other data and SaaS products were running in silos. Having this customized environment and a single pane improves the smoothness of the experience. The visibility has improved greatly in terms of the scalability and elasticity of the content. Purview enables us to demonstrate compliance in real time.

Purview has helped us deal quickly with insider threats because we can implement extended file solutions and see what's happening with raw shared content from various users. We can get a sense of what's being deleted and take action. At least 80 percent of our cases are getting solved.

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. 

The audit log capability enables us to observe things like changes in file sizes. At the same time, it simplifies management and control over the entire infrastructure, but it's specifically effective for Microsoft platforms. 

Purview's coverage of multi-cloud environments is essential. In today's world, we cannot stick to a single cloud provider because each one has a different set of benefits and advantages over the other. Many organizations typically try to interconnectivity and a cross-cloud platform, so it makes sense to have a single centralized compliance center and repository where you can track all activity at once. 

You can integrate iOS, Mac, and Android devices and data in other SaaS apps, which is important because we have a plethora of users using various devices across various operating systems. It makes a huge difference to have a centralized data solution for us. Purview natively integrates compliance across Azure Dynamics 365 and Office 365, which is quite important because Office 365 represents the new digital transformation. Purview covers the complete ecosystem, encompassing a lot of use cases and custom applications.

The solution takes into account critical regulations from around the world, which is vital for global organizations operating in countries that each have separate sets of rules and regulations, like GDPR. 

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. 

I want to see how many records there are,  how many files will be affected when we apply a change, and when the next retention cycle is going to run again. It would be helpful to have that integrated into the process.

I have used Purview for around four years now.

Purview is 99 percent stable. 

Purview is highly scalable.

I rate Microsoft support seven out of 10. The response times could be quicker. 

Neutral

We had previously used custom solutions, but Purview is quite effective for the problems we are trying to solve. 

Setting up Purview is straightforward. The deployment steps depend on the features you are using and what you want to target. I don't recall any major challenges setting this up. It takes a couple of engineers.

Purview is reasonably priced. We're working with so much data, and there are many jobs on the back end that might increase the cost, but it isn't a problem right now. 

I rate Microsoft Purview seven out of 10. It's important to consider how your end users will integrate and establish a process for your data. 

I use the solution as a data catalog, to scan databases and report data insights. 

I use the tool in projects as a medium to provide information as reports to the stakeholders. 

I am impressed with the product's search and data catalog features. 

The product needs improvement to edit the number of assets. It needs to be more inuitive as well. 

I have been using the product for one and a half years. 

I haven't encountered any serious stability issues. 

The product is scalable. 

We split the data into dedicated customer-specific internal tools. My company made the business decision of choosing the solution which helped to manage data catalog, reports and connect databases in one place. 

The product's deployment was complex because it involved the connecting of different elements within the framework. I have been partly involved in the tool's deployment. I worked with the business requirements and user acceptance testing phase. I worked as a business analyst. There were the engineering team, DevOps team, and data engineers working on the project. We have a team who maintains the consistency of the data logs and data scans. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. 

I am a Windows user and connect the tool to the Azure platform to work on it. I have never used it on iOS and Android. I am sure that the multi-platform ability is a good feature of the product. I also find it important for the tool to be connected to data protection platforms. I think that it's a benefit to have the tool get data information from other cloud providers and platforms. It is also important that the solution was built taking into account critical regulations from all around the world. 

In my opinion, the tool has reduced the number of tools that I need to interact with. There was a project requirement from a customer where we were supposed to use a complete platform with the Azure framework. The solution has the potential to be used as a governance tool which helps to know where the data is placed, how it flows through the system, etc. I may use the AI and automation in Purview sometime later. 

I believe that the product speeds up compliance and Microsoft has documentation that can help with the same. The solution has helped me save time. For the tool's reporting part, we didn't need to rely on other tools and sort through manual files storing the information. 

We use the product to prevent the loss of personal information across Microsoft 365. 

You can set up automated dates to alert on internal data. 

I don't see any issues with the product's scalability. 

The tool's support is good and very responsive. The first and second lines of support need to improve. 

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention is not cheap. 

We are heavy on the use of iOS. 

It is nice that the product delivers data protection across multiple cloud and platform environments. Azure is our primary cloud. 

We are happy with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention's security and visibility. 

I rate it a five out of ten. 

The primary purpose is to catalog all the different data sources. The idea is to get insight into what is available and, more importantly, to document and better understand the data quickly and easily. You're not doing any manual work, you're just scanning sources, which means you can automate it. It automates the majority of the documenting process.

The most important benefit is its data documentation and the data catalog. It saves a lot of time compared to doing those things manually. Normally, when you want to describe your sources and get an overview of what is available, it takes a lot of time for data engineers and other people in the company to document the data. That whole issue is eliminated by using Purview.

Also, the fact that you can easily view your metadata helps with data exploration. A lot of the time, there are so many sources at a company that at some point, most people don't even know what is available anymore. A really key feature is that not just one person but lots of people can access it for the same price, to do data exploration. They can all see what is available and decide what they want to see in a company report, for example.

The beauty of Purview is that it's all about a central location where everyone goes. I wouldn't recommend creating multiple Purview instances, although you might have one for production and non-production. But, ideally, you would just have one Purview for your entire organization and then provide access to multiple people to make use of it.

On the documenting side, in particular, it saves a lot of time, and time is money, especially when you are dealing with people entering data and information into Excel. That can be replaced by Purview and that saves a lot of time. Purview also gives you information that you can act upon. Instead of finding out too late, you can act earlier, and save money in that sense.

What I like the most about Purview is the fact that you can really easily connect to data sources and retrieve the metadata in a batch manner. Instead of having to manually write down which tables and columns exist and then describe them, you can do that process in one go, by simply connecting to a source. That's a huge time-saver and a great benefit of Purview.

The solution takes into account critical data compliance regulations from around the world and that is one of the most important aspects of Purview. New laws are being enforced for data compliance and a lot of companies have a great interest in this feature of Purview. I think Microsoft is going to be focusing on that for the next couple of years to help organizations improve on data compliance.

In terms of reducing time-to-action, if you set up a clever rule that gets applied to your scan—it would just take some time to create that rule—in theory, whenever you are scanning your data you could identify something that is going on and act upon it. But I haven't seen that in practice yet.

The fact that Purview delivers data protection across multiple platforms, including AWS and GCP, is really important, but I feel the tool can mature further in that area. You can set up rules and scan your data and then you can figure out whether your data is secure and compliant, but feel that Microsoft could improve on this and add more features to the tool. I think they will do so over time. The solution has only been generally available since last year, so it's still quite early in terms of maturity. The multiple platforms feature is very important and there is potential there.

A bit of a downside is that 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.

The data lineage is effective and useful when you are using all Microsoft products, but as soon as there's any complexity or you have a different tool in between, like Databricks for data transformations in your platform, for example, the lineage isn't going to be added in Purview because there is no connection to it. On the lineage side, a lot more can be done, but there is a lot of potential.

An additional feature I would like to see is in the following scenario. Suppose you have your sources scanned and you have all the tables listed in Purview. Right now, to update and label them, or to group them, would take a lot of time because you have to manually click on the assets and the tables that you have. But given that a database can have hundreds of tables, it would be helpful if you could update the assets in batch and, possibly, multi-select them. That would be a nice addition.

I have been involved with Microsoft Purview from the private preview stage, which was about two or three years. At that stage, it was only being shared with certain companies and nothing could be shared externally. In that phase, I got to share what I learned from the tool with Microsoft.

I haven't used it all the time since then, but more recently, I got to work with it for a few months so I got to see the latest update and changes that were made.

It is quite stable in terms of the scans running and not failing. It's not going to be slow or not function when you do an action inside of Purview. The stability is great.

It's really scalable, just like most things in Azure. You can add to it but it gets more expensive. You can add as many sources as you want, and the scanning of sources goes quite quickly, even for really big databases. The reason is that you're not copying any actual data, you're only getting the metadata, meaning a description of the tables and the schema, et cetera.

I haven't had to use Microsoft's technical support for Purview.

From my experience with other Microsoft Azure tools, the support is not bad, but it might take some time. Once you get someone working on it, an issue always gets resolved, but it can take a bit of time to get the right person involved to help you out.

For documenting data I have used Excel. I've seen huge Excel files with lots of data descriptions, and they took a lot of time to create. 

Also, on the data quality side of things, I have used an Azure data platform: an SQL database and a Power BI report. For example, if you're scanning data and you apply a rule to check if a column is empty so that you can classify it as "empty column," that would be a data quality rule. Instead of using Purview, I have used Azure.

It's very straightforward. There are not that many fields to fill in initially. Connecting sources, the first step, didn't take a long time. You really quickly get to see things, especially when it comes to Azure sources. It's all integrated so you can connect really easily. You just need to have authentication rights assigned. So connecting is quite fast.

The deployment is all-cloud. It's all Azure, which makes it really easy to deploy the tool really quickly. And if you have other data in the cloud, you can really easily connect to it.

The second part that takes a bit longer is defining the data, just like you would normally describe your tables and your columns and all your data definitions in Excel. In Purview, that also takes a bit of time. You have to find the way to describe it most easily. You can use the rules while scanning your data and automatically label or classify the data. But creating those rules takes a bit of time: How are you going to scan the data and what rules do you apply?

Getting the resources going just takes a day or two. But to connect to them and make things functionally available takes more time.

It's a one-man job. Even for connecting to resources, all you need is an admin who can grant you all the rights that you need for those sources and you can really easily scan them. The part where you need more people is on the business side because you need to describe, understand, and classify your data. That takes a lot more people because one person might know something about the customer database and a different person might know something about the finance database.

There is an investment of time involved, but once you set up those rules and you have the sources to scan, it automatically checks your data. It takes time to set it all up, but over a longer period of time, you will actually save time and see a return on investment. How fast that happens depends on your organization and how many data sources you have, as well as on how many people are using Purview and how efficiently.

You pay a minimum amount every month for the data map. You scan your sources and the metadata gets saved and then you pay for what is stored, which makes sense. However because there is a minimum amount, in the beginning, you might pay for more than you are using. That's something that some of my clients didn't like. That's why I say it's quite pricey; you're always paying a certain amount.

It would be nice if it went to entirely pay-per-use. For example, on Azure, when you have storage accounts, you pay for exactly how much you store. That would be nice to see in Purview as well. And while it's pay-per-use, you pay for features as well. For example, you pay for the cataloging part, including describing your data and adding labels and classifications. I would like to see a standard price and exact pay-per-use. 

I understand, in practice, that might not happen, but the pricing may be a bit overwhelming for some clients. They will say, "Hey, I'm already paying this much and now something else comes with another cost? Why is that?" It raises questions.

I'm working at a company that is a Microsoft partner, so it's all Microsoft-first.

We did do a quick analysis for a few other companies and there is some competition out there, but the other solutions are quite expensive. They are enterprise tools that are a bit more mature but the license costs $100,000 for some of them. Purview is pay-per-use and a lot of companies are interested in that. It's still quite expensive compared to most Azure components, but compared to the alternatives it costs less. That may be because it's not that advanced yet.

My advice is to involve people from the business side who can describe data and describe business terms. That's what is most important. Otherwise, it's just going to stay a technical implementation and it won't be used, which would be a huge waste. From the start, involve the people with a mandate who can actually start using it in the future.

Regarding its data connector platform for ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, there are so many sources in the world that they have a ways to go there, but I do feel, especially in the last year, that the solution has grown a lot in that area. All the big, and most-used data sources, like Amazon, SAP, and many other sources, have been added, which is a great step. But if you work with sources that are more unique, the kind that are not used by many other companies, those are not available and you would have to write code in Purview for them. You can use the API that is available and you could insert metadata and lineage information into Purview, but that is a manual process. You would have to develop that for specific sources.

Purview's natively integrated compliance across Azure, Dynamics 365, and Office 365 is also quite important, but I haven't worked on that myself.

In my experience, Purview hasn't come far enough yet to help us reduce the number of solutions that interact with each other. We use Purview right next to all the other tools, which is okay. It takes a lot of time for a company to adapt to using Purview. You can scan data quite easily and figure out how to apply rules and classify and document your data, but you still need people to adapt and make use of it. I haven't really seen that last part very much in practice yet. It takes a bit of change management to get people to make use of it properly. As a result, it hasn't replaced tools yet for me.

Purview doesn't enable you to show compliance in real-time, but you can schedule how often you scan your sources. When the sources are scanned and added to Purview, they become visible and you can see if you're compliant or not, but that's not real-time. You can schedule scans daily, for example, but then you have daily data sets rather than real-time data.

Overall, the potential for this solution is really large. Data management is extremely important and Microsoft is investing very heavily in Purview. Right now, it's not quite there yet.

Our client was looking to do data governance and we decided to implement Microsoft Purview for them. The client did not have very specific requirements, because they had no idea what to do with data governance and they wanted someone who could kick-start things. We implemented the basic functionalities for them.

Our client was impressed because they now understand how much sensitive data they hold. They now know they have to assign someone who can work as a data steward, someone who will manage and protect the sensitive data to make sure that no one else can access it.

It has also helped our client save time when compared with doing data governance manually. It could be up to 80 percent faster because, if we had to do it manually, it would take a lot of time to create a script to scan all of the data in the data repository. With Purview, we can configure the connectors and just hit the button and it will do the rest.

Overall, Purview is quite good for helping you stay on top of compliance.

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.

Also, although it is not automatic, managing the business glossary terms is valuable. If we have to work with other people who are also data governors, it's important to understand how the current data catalog is going to work with the business. We can do it manually to flag the business terms that we would like to handle.

It is also important that Purview delivers data protection across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments. Microsoft has built-in tools that can scan risky data that could be sensitive. It also provides connectors to other data platforms or clouds. These abilities are important for anyone who wants to see whether their organization has sensitive data, and how much.

In my understanding, because most of the connectors only scan databases or data lakes on multiple clouds, it is certainly not going to provide direct protection on other platforms, like iOS or macOS.

Also, Purview has no data ingestion capability. Of course, it can scan, but it won't import any data into Purview, just metadata. That is still important but it doesn't do data ingestion.

Another area for improvement is in managing the business glossary terms. If they could provide the same type of method that we use to configure the scan rule sets, that would be helpful. Currently, there is no option like this, so we have to do it manually. Automatic detection would be great.

I would also like to see third-party plug-ins. For example, there are several data quality or data management options on the market. Because Purview is not a 100 percent data governance solution, it would help if we could pick some of the good capabilities of other products. If we could plug Purview into the AI option from Ataccama, it would be enhanced immeasurably.

We implemented Microsoft Purview for a customer's company about two or three months ago.

It's stable. There were no weird glitches.

I think it's scalable, although Microsoft hasn't mentioned this explicitly. But it's a serverless solution, so it would scale. It just depends on how much data we need to scan.

We haven't had a chance to talk with Microsoft support because we haven't encountered any problematic situations.

Our client did not have a previous solution. They had no idea which one to go with. They just wished to have data governance and that's why we came up with Purview for them.

The initial deployment might seem complicated at first, but Microsoft has a guide with basic documentation on how to start and it's quite clear. Newcomers would need to understand the documentation first before they could implement this.

For example, for the resources in Azure, it might require the subscription owner to turn on some features. And in terms of the connectors, they would require an additional resource to store the data connection credentials called Key Vault. We had to implement all the resources to work along with Microsoft Purview.

It took about a week to get things up and running, but that was for the pilot solution. We did not have any very complex data to scan. We had to gather the information from the client about how much of the data they wished to scan, and when we got all the information, we started with the resources. 

We had three people involved in deploying it. One was responsible for most of the Azure connections and permissions. Another was the data governance operator who decided what to scan. The third was a data curator who made sure that all data was in the correct classifications.

It took about two weeks, after we implemented Purview, to realize the benefits of the most important features. The way that we implemented it, it was natively Microsoft-based, so there were not many other solutions to consolidate.

Compliance is not shown in real time because it might take some time to scan, but it depends on the amount of data involved. It's going to take some time to compile everything and show compliance.

Purview itself is on the cloud, but there is an on-premises database server that we need to connect with. Currently, there is no maintenance involved. It is done automatically.

The pricing is moderate. It's not too expensive, but it's not the most competitive.

In terms of additional costs, there is an option for advanced data lineage for lineage visibility with Power BI, but because our client did not have Power BI we didn't use this.

Although I haven't had a chance to work with Dynamics 365, I can see that Purview could be connected to that too, and I think it is important. And as far as I know, the classification rules built-in by Microsoft only apply to EU GDPR, as well as American and Canadian sensitive data protection. For all other regions, there are no options just yet.

If an organization wishes to do data governance that is not too advanced or sophisticated, Microsoft Purview could be the perfect fit for them, but they should, of course, do a PoC first.

We're building a new system from scratch for our clients and wanted to include the data governance. Their solution is hosted in Azure and it seemed logical to go with something that fits with that. I'm a solution specialist and we are partners with Microsoft. 

Purview has a pretty good interface and I'm satisfied with what the solution does and the price it's being sold at. It integrates well with Azure technologies. 

There are some limitations to the solution with regard to the lineage of data from different systems. I can see that everything works well, but if we start bringing in data from other systems not hosted in Azure the solution won't know whether it fits in the lineage space. Unfortunately, the solution only integrates with Microsoft Azure technologies so there is potentially some improvement that could be made in that area. In this case, we're lucky that the client has everything in Azure. 

I've only been using this solution for a couple of months. 

We currently have four Purview users. 

The initial setup was very easy, that's part of the appeal. 

Purview is reasonably priced and considerably less than most of its competitors.

I'm aware that the solution has some limitations, but that doesn't affect us in this case. If we do eventually need some features that are lacking, then we can look at other alternatives.

I rate the solution nine out of 10.