Jamf Protect vs. Norton Small Business

Jamf Protect will always have day 1 support for new OS updates, which is an amazing feature. The reporting could use a bit more work and the actions it captures are far beyond anything we would need, but it does that really well too. There are plenty of scenarios where I will gladly recommend this to other institutions. There are not many where I wouldn't. Maybe only if you have a hybrid environment, where licensing another endpoint protection may be beneficial to the budget.

Incentivized

For a small or mid-sized firm with distributed computing requirements like ours, Symantec Norton is well suited. It is an ideal solution as it is easy-to-use and the pricing is the right fit on account of geographical customisation. Small businesses, especially, realise the value of endpoint protection only when they encounter serious issues, therefore their product becomes well suited for those who may dither because of the lack of clarity and poor pricing structure of other options. However, the most important feature still remains its effectiveness, which makes it the most optimal option at the right price

Incentivized

• Security--it scans processes for 'bad stuff'
• Notifies admins of any issues or potential issues; entirely customizable and we create many custom notifications and groups.
• Integrates with Jamf Pro
• Monitor CIS benchmarks via a clean and nice looking dashboard

Incentivized

• In term of pricing
• In term of Advanced threat protection
• User friendly solution and good support team.

• The cloud GUI. It can be confusing at times.

Incentivized

• Confusing Workflow at Renewal
• Fixed Bundle Sizes may be an issue for Smaller Businesses with in-the-middle requirements
• Easier Installation

Incentivized

Jamf Protect is much lighter on system usage. It also has exclusive access to the threat protection baked into macOS. This lets Jamf Protect leverage the great work Apple is doing, and gives admins a way to extend that as well as view reports. Webroot was often missing things that were threats. SentinelOne was a bit more resource heavy. Solarwinds...err..."N-Able"...do I really need to say anything?

Incentivized

• Positive: It allowed us to deploy machines that were not deployable before due to compliance issues.
• Positive: Easy to implement in the shortest amount of time needed.
• Negative: Could be costly if you have a big environment

Incentivized

• Data Protection is ensured which ensures positive focus from all team members on their work which certain results in improved productivity at the individual level of 2-4% that consequently improves organisational productivity.
• Our cost of external inputs for data security issues is NIL therefore obviously reducing the bottomline by 1-2% which would be the average cost incurred by organisations of our size in general. Of course an event maybe costlier, but I am sticking to averages since we have had no events.
• Overall, we feel that the cost of security software is also lower on account of optimised pricing by Symantec. While the expense in this segment is a fraction of total IT costs, and therefore tangible savings are also fractional. However, So, since the value of outcomes (lack of security related negative events) is much higher, intangible benefits are even higher.

Incentivized