MicrosoftI agree with the other sentiments. Maybe it will grow on me as time goes by, but I don't see how this is a logical rename.
Was Azure AD a perfect branding? No, not even close. I could have done better. But how long has AAD been around for now? 10 years? I think at this point people who are in-the-know understand what it means.
But the problem your marketing team(s) has/have created is similar to how you've branded the "new LAPS" as "Windows LAPS" adjacent to "legacy" LAPS - it's a problem of search-ability and documentation. If I search for "LAPS" I could get information pertaining to either system due to how vague it is. That's a problem because the systems are mutually exclusive - documentation for one doesn't directly translate to the other.
Compare this with AAD > Entra ID. You've now created *two different* names that refer to the *same* service. So now when you do a search for "Entra" for the rest of 2023, you may not find what you're looking for outside of MS official documentation, which is incomplete compared to the wealth of documentation that industry has created for AAD. And now old documentation (assuming it's still relevant) is going to either need to be updated to reflect the rebrand or else new learners/beginners/industry entrants are going to have a rough time troubleshooting Entra if they don't know to look for AAD.
Another problem you've created is similar to your terrible branding of Microsoft Defender. When you say "defender" now we're referring to a "family" of products. Do you mean Defender ATP? Defender for Endpoint? Defender for Identity? Defender for Cloud Apps? Something else? The same problem is going to afflict Entra because it's a family. But clearly the most popular member of that family is going to be ID.
As a final note - I must say it's quite ironic if I jump back to the LAPS/Entra comparison.
I accept payment via wire for my consulting.
