We performed a comparison between CrowdStrike Falcon and Jamf Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"The product detects and blocks threats and is more proactive than firewalls."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Overall, what I found most valuable in CrowdStrike Falcon is its good mechanism. It also has a good reporting feature. CrowdStrike Falcon is an invaluable tool because, through it, you can take quick action, for example, when an OS is missing specific patches."
"The stability is very good."
"Its integration capability is valuable. It integrates easily with any OS."
"The most valuable features of CrowdStrike Falcon include Falcon Fusion workflows and endpoint detection capabilities."
"This solution consistently releases improvements. They have communicated their next two years of development which is powerful and covers all of our needs."
"I like the detection rates of mobile threats."
"We like Falcon's network visibility. We can see how threats are evolving on PCS or in the company network. The solution's real-time incident response is very fast."
"The UI is simple and self-explanatory. Everything is easy to understand."
"I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"Jamf Protect is a security product that helps us with CIS benchmarks and threat prevention."
"The tool's tech support is helpful and efficient. It also has an active community."
"We mainly use Jamf Protect to protect staff computers from malware and antivirus."
"The quick updates are really good. If a new OS update drops today, I'll have the Jamf Protect update within a few hours. It's also compatible with all Mac OS versions, and there's zero lag or performance impact."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"The solution is not stable."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"Detections could be improved."
"I have experience with a product called SentinelOne, which has a feature that allows for the customization of query languages. I would like to see such a feature for CloudStrike."
"The dashboard area must be improved. We have integration with Splunk, and we are creating a dashboard there. Their dashboard area must be up to date. It should have more details and more options to create the reports and things like that."
"Unfortunately, native applications are not supported."
"Tighter integration around XDR could be included."
"I've found that CrowdStrike's technical support could benefit from increased technical expertise."
"I would like CrowdStrike to provide some correlation in the threat analysis, so we can visualize things better."
"The malware analysis could be improved, as that's what we use the solution for the most and that change would make it a better EDR tool."
"CrowdStrike Falcon could be enhanced by extending its security capabilities to include NDR and XDR."
"The scope of improvement will fall under the support hierarchy that the tool offers to the latest version that Apple derives for any of the latest operating systems to launch."
"Jamf Protect protects just Mac devices, and we would love to have one solution for other platforms and not just Mac devices."
"I'd really like to see some data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities. More visibility into user activity on laptops would be helpful."
"Jamf Protect needs to improve its pricing."
"The solution's integration with other tools is slow."
CrowdStrike Falcon is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 105 reviews while Jamf Protect is ranked 44th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 5 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon is rated 8.8, while Jamf Protect is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon writes "Easy to set up with good behavior-based analysis but needs a single-click recovery option". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jamf Protect writes "Along with a good interface, the tool offers great technical support team". CrowdStrike Falcon is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Darktrace, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trend Micro Deep Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint, whereas Jamf Protect is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Business, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our CrowdStrike Falcon vs. Jamf Protect report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.