Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Jamf Connect vs Netskope Private Access comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (5th), Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (8th)
Jamf Connect
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
15th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
AI Customer Experience Personalization (62nd)
Netskope Private Access
Ranking in ZTNA as a Service
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the ZTNA as a Service category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.3%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Jamf Connect is 1.9%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Private Access is 3.7%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
ZTNA as a Service Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
iboss2.3%
Netskope Private Access3.7%
Jamf Connect1.9%
Other92.1%
ZTNA as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2701851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director
Enhances web security with a single pane of glass and flexible deployment
I don't see any need for improvement; one of the really good things about iboss as a company is that they listen to customer feedback. I have suggested enhancements, and they are responsive, making changes for the better, and they do a lot of testing. To improve iboss, although we haven't used it, we considered the VPN solution that comes with the highest tier licensing, which includes DLP and various other add-ons. We prefer using another product which automatically logs you back onto your network when turning on your PC. With iboss, the connection is manual, which doesn't meet our needs. Additionally, sizing can be tricky because, although the initial recommendations may seem adequate, actual usage may require more gateways than anticipated.
Joost Van 'T Wout - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Endpoint Engineer (macOS/Jamf) at PVH Corp.
Customizable and good password management but needs better user-level profile deployment
The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However, due to some limitations with the enrollment sequence and user limitations, we decided to discontinue using it We previously used Jamf Connect to synchronize local accounts with…
Prathamesh Samant - PeerSpot reviewer
Presales Manager at a manufacturing company with 201-500 employees
Has ensured secure remote access through real-time device checks and policy controls
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support, it is quite easy to integrate. Wherever customization is needed, it depends on the openness of the application being integrated with. If the other application has an open architecture where you have easy API integrations, then it becomes easier. However, in some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope. They can introduce the DLP feature for Netskope Private Access. Zscaler has that DLP feature. It is in their roadmap, but currently, they don't have it. If they have data protection or data loss prevention within their NPA, that would be a significant advantage.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"iboss is pretty scalable. They provide good support. The case managers you work with to coordinate what you need are pretty good."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"The most valuable feature of Jamf Connect is the dual login screen, which has simplified the login process and eliminated the need for users to enter their password multiple times."
"The tool supports different types of authentication. It also integrates seamlessly if you are using other Jamf products."
"Jamf Connect allowed us to fully customize everything, offering a branded way to change passwords and manage integration with Entra instead of LDAP."
"It's connection with Azure is the most valuable. It is easy to deploy and connect."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature is ease of access. It's convenient to do things like resetting passwords. Previously, users were bound to their domain. We had to bind the user to the domain and log them in through the AD. Now, using Jamf Connect, we don't face any of these challenges. Resetting passwords is hassle-free so we can regularly rotate passwords according to best practices."
"The initial setup of Jamf Connect was straightforward with clear instructions provided in the documentation."
"The most valuable feature is the synchronization of passwords with a local password, which works well."
"Even without extensive training, if you're a proficient IT professional, you can easily configure it."
"The product's scalability is good."
"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"There are several valuable features, like advanced security protections, especially the DLP (Data Loss Protection), and there's also browser and web filtering, or content filtering for our users to protect them when accessing certain links or websites, ensuring their security and permission."
"The main benefit for users from Netskope Private Access would be secure access from anywhere; they can easily access their systems or applications in their office premises or on-premises environment in a very secure way and the organization can also be assured knowing that whatever access they have been providing to their remote users goes through proper checks and balances before access is provided."
"Netskope Private Access covers a wide range of use cases with solutions for client-server and server-to-client connectivity patterns."
"In the firewall, we don't have a user-based policies list, and we can't create them. Netskope helps us to create user-based policies. For example, if there are specific teams like HR or more than nine teams, and we want logs from access over particular URLs, and we don't want to allow that specific URL for certain users, we can create these policies in Netskope. It's handy, easy to use for new users, and has a cool GUI interface. We can create multiple policies, and as for the proxy, it's a leading solution."
 

Cons

"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The area I would like to see improvement in is the ability with in the reporter to navigate directly to the content the user is traversing. It is kind of there, but it's not perfect. Quite frequently, I receive links that lead me to pages with error messages."
"For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company ExxonMobil."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Its pricing could be better."
"We have faced issues with the product's configuration. If we use the tool with other business manager solutions, then there is the issue of naming conventions. The tool needs to be careful with newer updates so that it doesn't break any of the existing configurations."
"The logs are an area with a shortcoming."
"Jamf's support could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve its licensing."
"Jamf Connect is beginning to implement Multi-Factor Authentication for offline authentication, but the setup documentation is insufficient."
"When a Mac is joined to Azure, the generic Pro console in the MDM should accurately display the Mac as joined to Azure in the inventory section. Currently, it shows "no domain account found," which can be misleading."
"There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enrollment, which prevent it from creating MDM-capable users."
"The solution's UI could be more user-friendly for the setup process."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"In some cases, it is a tedious task to do the integration where the application is not that open or it is not supported out-of-the-box from Netskope."
"The product is not easy to use."
"The major problem that we are facing is if we deploy Netskope on the server level or if we get a new server in the EMEA factor, it will affect all the machines. Recently, this has caused us to fail some reviews."
"I would rate the stability around seven out of ten. Sometimes, we face some difficulty, but it depends upon the complexity of the environment."
"Netskope needs to provide some kind of data protection strategy as well because, currently, if you connect through private access, we don't have any data protection policies or implementation."
"The cost has room for improvement."
"The solution needs to develop faster features. Its interoperability feature is not working. It takes six months to one year for any product to implement the improvements. However, the process should be faster to implement the changes quickly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"I rate the cost as three out of ten, with ten being the highest."
"The pricing model could be improved, especially considering the availability of alternative MDM solutions like Kandji, which offers similar features for free or at a lower cost."
"The pricing is good."
"We pay 2 dollars per device monthly. For the plus version, you have to pay 4 dollars per month. I think the product will give discounts based on the number of users and devices."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"It's relatively inexpensive."
"Jamf Connect has a yearly licensing cost, which is expensive."
"The pricing is definitely on the higher side."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"It is not the most expensive option, being more affordable than Zscaler, but it's also not the most budget-friendly choice available."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"It is significantly cost-effective compared to its contenders."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ZTNA as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
882,961 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Performing Arts
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern. There are cheaper alte...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Jamf Connect?
Jamf Connect requires a per-device license fee, which becomes quite expensive given our large company size. Each devi...
What needs improvement with Jamf Connect?
There is room for improvement with Jamf Connect in reducing its cost and overcoming limitations during pre-stage enro...
What is your primary use case for Jamf Connect?
The main use case for Jamf Connect was to synchronize local accounts with the identity provider, like Entra. However,...
What needs improvement with Netskope Private Access?
There is a mixed review on the integration part of Netskope Private Access. Wherever they have out-of-the-box support...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Private Access?
For secure remote access for people who are working out of the office, remotely, or traveling, my clients mostly use ...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Private Access?
I work with a system integrator, and nowadays, we have all these solutions in our portfolio for our customers. At tha...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Wandera, Wandera Private Access
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
Mastercard, Deloitte, PayPal, Toshiba, BNP Paribas, EY, Otis, Rollins, Eurostar, Frontier, Sealy, Rolex, VITAS Healthcare
Evalueserve, Stroock, Apria, Ather Energy
Find out what your peers are saying about Jamf Connect vs. Netskope Private Access and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,961 professionals have used our research since 2012.