We performed a comparison between Jamf Pro and ManageEngine Endpoint Central based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has reduced the risk of security breaches by 30%."
"We have found the solution is capable of scaling."
"This product offers an alternative solution to other UEM (Unified Endpoint Management) solutions."
"I can see that the patch management process is much improved with the bundled patch management option available in Microsoft Intune compared to the KPI deployment required by the other deployment solutions."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Intune is having all our devices compliant with our policies."
"Intune's most valuable features are the device, compliance, and configuration policies."
"The stability of Microsoft Intune is good."
"It works well if you have a Microsoft environment."
"Being able to push out elevation policies to users on an Adhoc basis helps us when users are not in the office."
"The zero-day support regarding new Apple hardware and Apple operating systems is very good."
"We found the initial setup to be simple."
"It offers professionals an endless amount of possibilities to keep users and the company happy."
"The design of the GUI, as compared to other solutions, really makes a difference."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to manage all devices through Apple's DEP and forcing them into Jamf pre-stage enrollment."
"Being able to easily deploy apps and patches to our client computers with minimal hands-on time from our techs has been huge."
"It's as easy as procuring the licensing for the apps and then setting it to the volume purchasing back in Jamf."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Patch Management."
"The stability is very good."
"It's a complete product that allows you to remote troubleshoot, has an inventory of systems."
"The centralized control of all of our Windows hardware that this solution offers has been most valuable to our organization."
"The stability is great."
"I like being able to image over the network. That's a nice feature that it has. Patch management is pretty decent on it as well."
"Honestly, I have to say all features together have become the Swiss army knife of desktop management. They all work hand in hand. Software deployment saves an unbelievable amount of time installing an application on hundreds of computers."
"Its cross-platform capabilities and the ability to do both OS-level patching and third-party patching are valuable. It is difficult to find a software product that will do all that for you out of the box, and you don't have to do any configuration other than your initial setup. Once you do that, there is a very minimalistic approach to getting it operational. You can have it up and running within a 20-minute time span."
"There can be more logs. I do not have any other requirements."
"Integrating certain group policies can be challenging and may necessitate using on-premises systems to integrate them with Microsoft Intune."
"Enhancements for managing MacOS more comprehensively would be beneficial."
"The UI is not user-friendly and has room for improvement."
"There is room for improvement, particularly in terms of compatibility, extending beyond the well-known major brands."
"There are a lot of small use cases where we realized that some technical solution was missing in Microsoft in comparison to other products. For example, it lacks something similar to sensing or location-based rules and configurations."
"Microsoft Intune lacks the ability to provide seamless remote assistance or remote control."
"They need to add more group policies. Intune currently does not have many group policies that you can deploy. Its reporting, which is very limited at the moment, also needs improvement. It will be great if they can add report customization. Its stability needs to be improved. Sometimes, when you register a device in Intune, it doesn't show up instantly on the engine portal on the admin side. They need to provide better support for complicated issues. They also have a long turnaround time."
"For Windows, we have a reset option. We'd that option available for Mac."
"The solution needs cheaper training."
"The solution should offer beta testing for new products."
"I would like to be able to see what policies and configuration profiles are tied to what Smart/Static groups."
"There needs to be a mass policy change tool."
"I'd like to see Jamf add Unified Endpoint Management, but it's not going to happen. It's too complex. We tried that for so many years, and no one can do this for Windows and macOS. It can be done with iOS, but that's not the case here. If you want device management for a real laptop operating system, you need two systems. They're very different."
"Every once in a blue moon, we wind up with a rarely-seen superbug that takes support weeks to months to solve."
"I'm not exactly sure where it could be improved off the top of my head, but there is room for improvement."
"I would like to see more click to complete actions such as - USB lockdown for Mac, the ability to check AV compliance on servers, bit locker controls, printer tracking or print page tracking, self-help for self-healing like "BMC my IT" and more options in the self-service menu other than just software - maybe add integration in ADSelfService at the self-service menu."
"Not many things are needed for improvement, everything seems to be great as it is. One thing that would be good to have would be the ability to add MDM to a tablet running Android 5.0 using the EMM Token Enrollment. If we wanted to add MDM to an older tablet, we just have to go the "long route" to get it added."
"Each of their products is an independent product, and they don't have anything to do with each other. It is a suite of packages. They all run independently, and they all are a little different because they were acquired differently. They could standardize their portfolio."
"I would like to see them include the ability to find out the network usage but I believe that might be a feature of it already."
"The solution isn't fully stable, and, when it goes down, it's hard to get it up and running."
"The only problem with it is that the setup isn't very intuitive. I know that they just upgraded the product to make it a little bit easier to use, but compared to some of the other platforms, it is not easy to configure it, set it up, and get it running. However, once you have set it up and got it running, it runs great."
"The product's remote access manager needs improvement."
"The MDM feature isn't very good. It doesn't support Amazon vendors."
More ManageEngine Endpoint Central Pricing and Cost Advice →
Jamf Pro is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 103 reviews while ManageEngine Endpoint Central is ranked 4th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 59 reviews. Jamf Pro is rated 9.6, while ManageEngine Endpoint Central is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Jamf Pro writes "Customizable with a self-service portal and a good security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine Endpoint Central writes "An in-depth and intuitive product with good cross-platform capabilities, but they should have a more global support channel". Jamf Pro is most compared with VMware Workspace ONE, SOTI MobiControl, Microsoft Configuration Manager, IBM MaaS360 and Kandji, whereas ManageEngine Endpoint Central is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Workspace ONE, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, SOTI MobiControl and BigFix. See our Jamf Pro vs. ManageEngine Endpoint Central report.
See our list of best Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.