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 computer software company with 51-200 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

"We chose iboss for both zero trust and proxy (SWG) because their SWG was superior."
"Technical support is pretty sharp and very responsive."
"From a use-case scenario, what I like the most is the plug-in. I like the fact that we can do the filtering of these devices offsite independent of the network they are connected to, and we do not have to have traffic coming back inside our network."
"Iboss is a solution that prevents advanced persistent threats, and has a zero tolerance for attacks."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"It was a very easy product to install. It can be deployed very fast."
"Jamf Connect is an identity provider, and once you log in, you will have all the device's access."
"It's a good and stable tool, so you should use it if you have a need."
"Jamf Connect is a pretty simple and straightforward tool overall."
"It is easy to integrate into any existing IT workflow."
"The tool supports different types of authentication. It also integrates seamlessly if you are using other Jamf products."
"The most valuable feature is the synchronization of passwords with a local password, which works well."
"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 solution is scalable."
"The base features have been fantastic. The ability to be able to granularly assign application access to end-users has been really good."
"It is a stable solution."
"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."
"The initial setup of Netskope Private Access is pretty simple and straightforward."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is being able to see who is accessing the application, whether it is a managed device or a bring-your-own-device published by Netskope."
"The product's scalability is good."
"In the VPN scenario, what was happening, the user would get back to the complete source. But in NPA, the application will go to the user. There is an outbound connection. There is no inbound. Storage providers are also not there. It's the best feature because it is the replacement of the VPN."
 

Cons

"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"Their on-premise hardware's network interface is capped at one gigabit, which is sort of a problem. If you stand a filter up where all traffic flows through that, according to them, in order to go above a gigabit, you have to have multiple devices, which in today's IT seems a little bit silly. They could easily put in an SFP port into their device that could accommodate 10 gigs or at least offer a box."
"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."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Regarding pricing, setup costs, and licensing, iboss is not cheap, and that's my only concern."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"Its pricing could be better."
"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."
"The logs are an area with a shortcoming."
"What can be improved is the login banner resizing. Currently, it is not fully compatible and could benefit from being a full-screen size banner on the Mac device."
"Jamf's support could be improved."
"We've had some issues when users restart their devices because the device asks for credentials afterward. Jamf Connect asks for a username, password, and MFA."
"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."
"Overall, there is a lack of consistent experience sometimes with some of their features."
"There could be an ability to access one server from another when we have console access to the first server."
"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 Private Access could improve by enhancing visibility of user performance and application performance. It should also integrate wider DLP and inspection engines on private access traffic."
"We faced certain issues with China users as it can be rather challenging for them due to the presence of Great Firewall."
"Netskope detects certain data or contents, but there are some limitations on how we can customize those policies for DLP."
"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."
"The product is not easy to use."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"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."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"Jamf Connect has a yearly licensing cost, which is expensive."
"It's relatively inexpensive."
"The pricing is good."
"The pricing is definitely on the higher side."
"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 solution's price is reasonable."
"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."
"I rate the cost as three out of ten, with ten being the highest."
"There was about 60% ROI, just in terms of savings. We had 40% to 60% reduction in monthly operational costs by using Netskope."
"It is not cheap, but the value of the solution is there. It's worth the investment."
"Netskope Private Access is more inexpensive than other products."
"The tool's price is normal. It is not very cheap but good compared to the competitors."
"I believe that the price for Netskope Private Access is included in the features or functionality my company purchased from NetSkope."
"When it comes to pricing, Netskope Private Access is relatively cheap compared to other solutions."
"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.
882,103 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
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
7%
Performing Arts
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 Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
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: December 2025.
882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.