Non-Microsoft use cases are not very high. It's limited for now. They are continuously trying to evolve and trying to provide the latest right now. It is mature only on the more popular open source kind of applications or source tools. That is a limitation that it brings in. That said, if you already have a complete Microsoft stack then it will work really well.

They still need more coverage on Microsoft Dynamics 365. It's an area they are still working on. 

The lineage data capabilities could be improved. They need data quality as a solution. They need to have that as part of their suite. 

If I want to drive governance and adoption, when it comes to dashboarding and understanding maturity, it still needs work. There are other better, more competitive tools. 

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.

Also, I wouldn't say that the remediation of policy violations is particularly great. It has improved, but it's not very easy to dig into things if there is a policy violation. A lot of them are false-positives.

It has helped reduce the time to action on insider threats, but there are quite a lot of false positives there as well. Overall, it's a work in progress for Microsoft.

I would also like to see pre-built reporting. The dashboard isn't really that intuitive. It would be good to have more intuitive dashboards that you can drill down into or even customizable dashboards.

Some of the menu headings may not be easy to understand for some people. For example, when I first used Purview, I noticed that one of the self-compliance centers had changed its name. Microsoft has done a huge amount of updates, and sometimes it's hard to keep track of what Purview can do. We almost constantly have to explore it.

Maybe Microsoft could have a 365 roadmap where we can look at upcoming features, or some kind of bulletin announcement for Purview users that explains new features and what they can do in simple terms.

We could also look at the menu settings. In my experience of using Purview, we've never used it as an exclusive system for IT professionals or technical staff. We were very keen that other specialists around the business made use of some of these features because we thought that some of what Purview could do was relevant to other departments as well as IT. For example, we have HR managers and financial staff who use it.

I think that some of the terminology in Purview is pitched toward IT and tech professionals, and it may not be immediately understood by other specialists. This is something that could be improved.

It works very well, but there are some limitations because it is a new product. For a lot of features, you need to wait until the time that Microsoft announces that they are generally available. Or, a lot of times, some features are not even available. Then, you need to go through their support channel. So, it's a mixed bag.

The API needs some improvement when connecting to non-Microsoft API sources. This is a limiting factor.

The integration with modern data warehouses needs a lot more traction. Because clients will not always adopt Microsoft Azure as their cloud, as they can choose to be in a heterogeneous environment. For example, I have three warehouses: Synapse, Snowflake, and Amazon Redshift. In this case, I would hesitate to adopt Purview, as it is not the best choice at this point in time.

I would like to see it connect more. The macOS-related audit logs are extensive for the M365 ecosystem. But when we're talking about managed devices, I'm missing the capabilities that you have with monitoring both Android and Windows-based devices. In a perfect world, if Apple and Microsoft could get along a little better and have more extensive information in that audit for Apple-based products, we would have a perfect machine. I don't see how there would be another best-in-class candidate.

Also, my focus is mainly on SAP, ServiceNow, and Jira connectivity. And for those, we do still employ non-Microsoft solutions. I would love to integrate everything with SIEM into Microsoft Sentinel, but we can't push that through with a large client just yet. While I like the effort that is being put into non-Microsoft data sources, I'm not always happy with the information that is available.

By comparison, the level of detail that I have in our SharePoint environment is perfect visibility of what everyone is doing. When we're talking about Windows devices, I have perfect visibility into what they're doing with their devices. I lose a little bit of that control when we're talking about third-party connectors. Compliance-wise, I would like to see more ability to audit from a user perspective, where I could extrapolate what the user was thinking or trying to do. That would allow me to enforce rules that are less restrictive. I would like to give as much freedom as possible, as long as people are not acting with bad intent.

Purview enables you to let go of—I would not call them "unnecessary staff"; but we always have to downsize where possible. We can now do the work of 10 administrators with only three. We can now manage a 5,000-user environment with just one administrator on Purview. That gives us a lot of leeway in project budget to focus on expanding and improving the network, the setup, and user adoption as well. In a company of 5,000 users, being able to let go of one administrator enables you to set up a "champion" program and educate your users. You can't just block users from doing things that are wrong. You have to teach them how to use the product in the correct way. Microsoft Purview, the way it has been evolving, enables you to do that.

Data quality has been a highly requested feature among customers. While it was initially scheduled for release in December last year, I anticipate that this feature will be available soon this year.

I suppose that with the integration of all three solutions—data security, data governance, and risk and compliance—there will be a clearer direction regarding changes on the people side of things. Like any other changes, this integration will necessitate new responsibilities, processes, and policies. It's essential to outline the expected changes on the people side, such as identifying impacted personas and defining their new responsibilities.

As we are looking at Purview as an enterprise-level tool, there are two areas where I still see that there is something that can be improved.

One is about disaster recovery. Purview has not matured in the way of building the tool without having disaster recovery. We don't have disaster recovery or high availability. If anything goes wrong, like, there are any changes happening, and I want to roll back, there is no way that I can roll back in the existing system.

For example, I have a data source in which one of the users has dropped or deleted the data unknowingly or accidentally. In that case, there is no way to roll back those changes. That's one place where Purview can improve it.  

There is room for improvement when it comes to Purview's data connector platform in supporting ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources.

Microsoft has done an impressive job. I've been in this domain for over 15 years and have used IBM's data governance tool in the past. Microsoft's current offering sets a baseline with features like data governance catalogs and connectivity to various tools.

The product is evolving, and there are some bugs, especially in lineage data lineage and adding parameters. It's maturing, and the data lineage needs improvement. While connecting to Microsoft products is a piece of cake, connecting to external ones, like Snowflake, is more challenging. 

The tool's Windows PC offerings are far better compared to the granularity on the Mac side. The product must provide better integrations with OS X and iOS. There must be feature parity. The product must also provide better integrations with other ecosystems. I'd love to see Microsoft integrating with Google Workspace, at least in the EDU K-12 space. Most people in the EDU space use Google Workspace and Microsoft. Extending the capabilities of Purview would be phenomenal.

Microsoft Purview's ability to deliver data protection across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments is important, but there are some limitations. For example, if we have our own cloud solution, Purview cannot currently protect it. However, we can integrate Purview with other OEMs, such as Forcepoint, McAfee, or Symantec, to provide DLP functionality for our CASB. Additionally, Purview cannot protect cloud platforms that are part of a shared domain, such as our own website, unless they are part of the public domain. Purview needs to add DLP support.

One of the things I would like to recommend is that Purview doesn't have the option to push policies or updates in real-time. Instead, it is based on the last five-bit communication. We cannot make any changes to this. It is based on the device when it is communicating with the server. If I want to do this forcefully from the server, if I want to send a wake-up call to all or selected agents throughout the organization, Purview does not have this capability in the GUI.

The reporting functionality needs to be improved. I have found that the solution is not satisfactory for reporting. We have to use Power BI to generate the overall profit, but this requires a lot of configuration. In another solution, we can easily achieve the same reporting functionality.

Purview does not have OCR functionality or network web. Therefore, OCR functionality is not included. OCR is available for Teams, but it does not work as expected. For example, it does not work well for systems that deliver to the recipient database, which could cause problems if it does not match our rules.

Purview has limitations connecting to Android devices and SaaS devices.

While Purview's data connector platform can ingest information from non-Microsoft data sources, it is slow to do so and the information may become outdated.

I would rate Purview's data loss prevention for remediating violations a six out of ten. The reason is that Purview does not have an option for endpoint discarding. In contrast, Forcepoint and Trellix are more mature DLP solutions that offer endpoint discarding. This allows us to scan endpoints for sensitive data, take a replica of that data, and store it in a safe location. We can also encrypt the data on the endpoint. Microsoft Purview DLP does not offer this functionality. It is only available for Teams and email.

I would like to see them simplify advanced hunting. 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.

Another issue is that for incidents, only DLP alerts are available in Purview, not the incidents themselves. An incident consists of multiple categories of alerts belonging to multiple products. But in Purview, we can only see DLP alerts, yet those alerts could be part of an incident in the incident portal. We are not able to see if a particular alert ID is part of a given incident.

For example, if an exfiltration happens, the exfiltration-related alert will only be triggered inside of Purview. But it's possible that before the exfiltration, there was a kill chain there, such as initial access, privilege escalation, a user being compromised, or a brute-force attack. Those types of alerts are not available inside Purview. They are covered in other Microsoft products. All those products' alerts will combine into one case and generate an incident as a single story. But in Purview, the incident is not available.

The out-of-the-box connectors and being able to connect to third-party apps and data storage were some of the areas where they started off strong, but that's something that I think needs to continuously be at the forefront of the developers and the engineers for Purview to make sure that it is constantly up to date and can talk with any data source that it may need within a data state. So I would say that's not necessarily a con, but it's a possible weak point that could be strengthened.

I would like to have AI functionality on the dashboard to help me analyze and report on the data that we capture using Purview on a daily basis.

Purview's data loss prevention for macOS endpoints has some limitations, and the end-user experience of recovering from a failure is lacking.

I would like to be able to search for labels using Purview to see what items are affected and the time periods in which they will be active. This would allow us to export the results for specific business areas, which would make our lives a lot easier. We could also use this information to identify sensitive information types and reduce false positives.

The utility system format, the policy tips and user descriptions of sensitivity labels, and the overall policy tips that are shown in the loss prevention policy have room for improvement.

The one thing it doesn't do is data quality. That's its only pitfall. The problem is people think it does. So either they're not marketing it right, or, eventually, it's on the road map, and they haven't got to that part yet.

In order to get data in and out, you have to use custom code using Python. That's an inconvenience, and almost every customer wants that feature. For example, let's say I run some scans on some data, and then that data goes away. This issue is Purview still shows it. There's no easy way to clean up your orphan data. That's a problem.

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.

We have two instances. One is for everything, and the other is for the production environment. Sometimes there is a bug when the scan runs overnight. When we come in the next morning, it's still running, so we have to stop and restart it. This is costly.

Purview's data connector platform for non-Microsoft data sources is good, but there is some functionality that hasn't been developed yet. There are some servers that it can't connect to yet, because they're still in a trial process. However, there are obviously some non-MS sources it can support, which is good. Hopefully, for the ones it can't connect to, that will be rolled out soon.

There are other things that need to be developed in Purview. The data retention isn't great at the moment, and in that area we need certain functionality to be built. However, it's a very good tool and one I would champion.

Overcoming certain control issues would significantly enhance our overall satisfaction. We encountered challenges in building a custom subscription, and certain essential Azure financial control functions, like customer-managed keys, were not implemented.

Purview's data connectivity platform has a good set of connectors for ingesting data from non-Microsoft data sources. However, it still falls short in terms of coverage of other systems. It is mostly integrated with the Microsoft stack, but there are connectors to other systems and sources of information. Overall, Purview is not a one-stop shop for protecting company information.

I am not sure that Purview was built with compliance guidelines in mind. It does have a component called Compliance Manager, which allows us to track our adherence to different standards, such as security and privacy standards around the globe. However, this is more of an add-on. I think there is still a significant gap between the technical capabilities of Purview and the ability to drive compliance or prove compliance through its use. I think this is a major gap that Microsoft does not adequately address. Purview is not a GRC tool. It is a set of security features, labeling features, and lifecycle features that do not come close to GRC tooling in terms of functionality. Additionally, there is no strong integration with the compliance framework, either in terms of rolling it out or proving our adherence to it.

I would like to see improvements to the compliance manager, such as making it easier to start small and grow over time. This is not possible at this time.

The current event-based retention management is very poor. This is an area that needs improvement. We need to be able to more natively or near natively label content for retention and sensitivity across other lines of business systems like Workday and ServiceNow. This would allow us to extend labeling to those applications and make it native. This would be of great benefit to our clients.

Purview's DLP protection has some downsides. One downside is that the tips only appear in native applications. This means that users will not see them in other applications, such as web browsers. Another downside is that the tips only cover a subset of all the information. This means that users may still need to seek out additional information elsewhere.

The technical support has room for improvement.

The reporting is limited and has room for improvement.

Privacy features should be integrated into the core product rather than offered as optional add-ons, as privacy is not a luxury but a fundamental requirement.

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. 

Another thing involves SharePoint. We have everything in SharePoint up on the cloud, and we want to ensure it's secure, so we have blocked all external access. You need to have one of our devices and our codes. But the C suite wasn't pleased because it was accessible externally for a while. And we have a penetration company that does testing. They were able to harass one of our users enough that they finally clicked the button that says "Approve this Login," so it just takes one time. 

They find red flags everywhere in organizations. The gut reaction was to cut off external access for now and figure out what we can do down the road after that, but this is a stopgap measure. However, the C suite told us that it wasn't good enough, but there was no way somebody outside could access our systems. You need to be on a trusted IP or our VPN. We have conditional access configured.  

We hired an actual outside consultant company to come in And I've been working with them for close to a year now. We're trying to leverage Purview and Power Apps to automate our document management. We have a ticket open with Microsoft because that's one more thing we're struggling with. It's supposed to go through and look for any PII data, like Social Security numbers, etc. We also have really low retention policies. For example, our emails are retained for only six months maximum. Team conversations are saved for two days. They're they're brutal. Legal discovery can be expensive, so they want to make sure we don't have anything to discover. 

I'm wondering if Purview can do some of the things that we're struggling with, and we're tripping over ourselves because the other thing we did was configure it so you have to be in a special group to even access those files. I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Purview Information Protection has a labeling component. Still, I don't know how much it organizes labeled documents, and I think it also includes labeling after detecting user behavior that the system tracks.  They talked about something similar in one of the keynotes I recently listened to. I'm like, "Why are we not doing that?"  I'm looking at how we're just beating our heads against the wall. Even if we get this in place, it would still be very challenging. 

We like this In terms of usability and security. It will be difficult for our teams to do their jobs with all this other garbage in place. At this point, we've got it almost always set up, but it isn't working the way we need it to on the Power Apps side of things. 

And we've got a ticket open with the Power Apps team to figure out why it isn't working because it's supposed to be on a scheduled thing, but we've let it sit for weeks at a time, and nothing ever happens. It doesn't run. And there's no way to monitor. We don't know if it's doing anything, or we can look at our files to make sure that could be improved. 

I am interested in exploring the process of data scanning to identify data lines that do not contain stored procedures. This would allow us to detect potential black boxes within our data, where we are unable to trace the flow of information and identify all instances of stored procedures. Additionally, we would like to expand the reporting capabilities beyond Power BI to encompass other visualization tools such as Tableau, Looker, and others.

Reflecting organizational changes within Purview is impractical. Any such changes necessitate discarding existing data and starting anew, which increases both the cost and time required for maintenance. Therefore, I believe that enhancing Purview's maintainability is crucial.

The overall cost of deploying this solution could be better. It seems that middle and small-sized organizations are not completely happy with deploying this solution in terms of the cost. It would be good if they concentrate on the cost part. 

Another improvement area is their customer support and service. The resolution time for an issue could be better.

It is still growing. It does not meet all the requirements from the security point of view. It supports only a limited number of tools and technologies that pertain to Microsoft products. If you want to leverage other solutions such as Workday or Oracle Fusion, features will be coming up, but as of now, it is for the Microsoft suite. 

It is still growing as a data connector platform for supporting ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, so not all the products are supported as of now. 

As a data catalog tool, it needs to have a connection with all the sources. This improvement is definitely needed because they are supporting only Microsoft-related products but not third-party products.

One area for improvement is the detection of data types. This is really important. It has some of that functionality, but I consider it very limited. Maybe they can add some custom programming, or machine learning could be particularly useful for the detection of the nature of the data.

If it could tell us, for example, when a given type of data is a social security number, that would be helpful. Currently, we need to open it and determine what the format is. We would like to know if a given type of data is PII data.

I've been working closely with Microsoft support on issues with the Microsoft Purview Information Protection scanner's on-premises services. While it's a solid tool, there's still room for improvement in my opinion. I've submitted numerous recommendations, from solutions to address specific problems to the implementation of new features like bulk scanning across multiple servers, not just individual paths. I've also encountered a high number of false positives in the classifier and made suggestions for resolving them. Microsoft support is currently reviewing my input, and we're collaborating to refine the scanner and minimize false positives. It's important to remember that this is a new technology, and like any newborn business venture, it's prone to growing pains. Errors and mistakes are inevitable along the way, but they're also valuable learning opportunities.

Frequent daily updates from Microsoft can cause interface elements like buttons to appear and disappear, making navigation unpredictable. Additionally, Microsoft also generates new licenses that require investigation to identify each new license.

I'd like to see them improve the training for implementing this type of solution. If we need particular things, we need to be able to understand how to implement them right away, and not wait days or weeks. 

Purview needs to improve its DLP capabilities for removable devices such as external drives and USB devices.

The custom data classification for the African region needs to be improved.

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. Certain permission issues or protracted permission updates could arise due to suboptimal configuration, potentially extending the expected timeframe.

Enhancing the tool's capability to connect to multiple sources would be valuable. Also, when data is transformed in other systems, the tool should capture the relevant metadata and generate lineage for those systems as well. Thirdly, addressing limitations, such as relying on Apache Atlas for mitigation, should be handled within the Microsoft tool itself rather than external dependencies like Apache Atlas.

Microsoft is doing an excellent job improving the platform, and they have a lot coming out shortly. However, the licensing around compliance could be much more transparent; it isn't clear for many organizations what kind of license they need to use, whether that's E5, E5 compliance, an information protection license, user-based, or platform-based. More information here would be a welcome improvement.

Blueprints and landing zones like we have in Azure would be great to see in Purview. The solution could offer a baseline or blueprint of recommended settings for compliance regulations such as GDPR and ISO, which could be applied with a simple switch in the options. 

Some dashboard centralization, like one overview dashboard instead of many loosely connected ones, could be a good improvement.

We must build our own assessments to comply with Dutch regulations, a mix of international and EU standards, as they aren't native to the solution. Many of our clients in the Netherlands require adherence to Dutch regulations, and as well as Purview covers the international aspect, the Dutch side is covered less than we would like.

There's room for improvement regarding Purview's data loss prevention for educating users on how best to handle sensitive data. Microsoft is working on improving the policy tips. Still, from a user's perspective, I want to see more information in the case of a policy violation, such as context or details on why a specific rule is triggered. There are ways to tweak the DLP options, but a significant improvement would be real-time notifications when working on an email or message within Teams, for example. DLP is only triggered when sending or saving, so real-time notifications would be great. The basic functionality is there, but there's room for improvement. 

We have had a lot of issues since we moved to Unified Support. There have been work gaps there, and we believe they fixed them, but we need to make sure that they are going to be sustainable. It is to be seen.

In terms of features, our technical team would be able to speak about the areas of improvement better. In terms of additional features, that would again require a conversation with the technical team as we are thinking about what pieces and parts are missing. We have a feature set that we have shared with Microsoft, and that gets into a lot of detail. We did the analysis. We believe that we are on the road map for some of those feature sets.

One drawback of Microsoft Purview, though it's beneficial and easy to use, is that when you start plugging in connectors for third-party sources when setting the solution up for data collection, it becomes a bit more tricky. There's limited documentation, so it's not as intuitive as setting up other parts of Microsoft Purview. If the process of connecting with third-party cloud providers and other SaaS products could be simplified, that would make Microsoft Purview a better product.

In terms of how Microsoft Purview supports ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, from a user experience point of view, it's a bit more challenging and results in a bit more struggle in that area. Overall, it's decent, but it would benefit customers if Microsoft spent more time and energy improving that experience and getting it on par with other Microsoft products. Microsoft could make it a lot easier to build connections with other cloud vendors, such as AWS and GCS. Microsoft will get there eventually, but it needs to understand its customer base and look at the percentage.

It would help if we could have a view of the devices we know to be potential weak points in an organization—those couple of devices that are very prone to external attacks. If we could have a view something like we have in CrowdStrike—which is, I believe, the biggest competitor to Microsoft when it comes to security—a node nodal view, which we also have in Defender, that would make it a more complete, one-stop solution. That would save a lot of time for the admins and the engineers.

There are some non-Microsoft file formats that are not supported. 

While they seem to be focused on Sharepoint and OneDrive, I'd advise that if somebody saves something locally to their hard drive, this should also be classified and protected. 

The DLP has to become more mature now that there are other competitors present in the market.

I'm not sure if there are any missing features. 

What I would like to see improved is the documentation scanning and printing.

The partial scripting could be improved with a better GUI.

It could reduce pricing to encourage usage. 

Microsoft Purview integrations with non-Microsoft products have room for improvement.

The technical support has room for improvement.

The Microsoft Purview data connector platform, which supports ingestion from non-Microsoft data sources, can be somewhat complex. For instance, when using Linux or Mac OS, additional agents are required. However, deploying these agents can lead to high resource consumption, such as increased CPU, hard disk, and RAM usage.

The performance has room for improvement. 

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.