We performed a comparison between Jamf Connect and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ZTNA as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Jamf Connect is a pretty simple and straightforward tool overall."
"It's connection with Azure is the most valuable. It is easy to deploy and connect."
"I would rate the product's scalability an eight out of ten."
"It's a good and stable tool, so you should use it if you have a need."
"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 tool supports different types of authentication. It also integrates seamlessly if you are using other Jamf products."
"Jamf Connect allows for easy and seamless joining of Mac devices to Azure AD, eliminating the need for third-party involvement or support engineer assistance."
"The most valuable feature is the synchronization of passwords with a local password, which works well."
"It does the job. What it is needed for. I can use it for VPN, I can use it for secure connections, I can use it as a firewall. So the solution does the job."
"The most valuable features are the File Type Control and SSL bypass policies. We"
"The scalability is pretty good."
"It is easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are its ability to integrate with multiple IDPs and application segmentation."
"The ZPA is a unique feature which offers VPN along with all the additional security needed."
"Zscaler Private Access is a platform that eliminates the complexity of VPN configuration."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
"Overall, there is a lack of consistent experience sometimes with some of their features."
"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 solution's UI could be more user-friendly for the setup process."
"The logs are an area with a shortcoming."
"The configuration could be faster."
"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."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve its licensing."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
"SCMP support would be one of the biggest improvements in my opinion. More speed improvements are also required."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
"The stability could be improved."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"There is some issue while accessing the portal. It takes too long."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
Jamf Connect is ranked 8th in ZTNA as a Service with 10 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 34 reviews. Jamf Connect is rated 9.4, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Jamf Connect writes "Enhances user convenience by streamlining login processes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". Jamf Connect is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Netskope Private Access, VMware Workspace ONE, Zscaler B2B and Zimperium, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cloudflare Access and FortiSASE . See our Jamf Connect vs. Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange report.
See our list of best ZTNA as a Service vendors.
We monitor all ZTNA as a Service 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.