Developed exclusively for macOS, Jamf Protect provides a solution to maintain endpoint compliance, monitor for, respond to, and remediate security incidents on macOS with minimal impact to the device and end-user experience. Jamf Protect detects Mac-specific threats, and prevents known malware from running on devices and quarantines them for later analysis. Jamf Protect forwards data to a system of record to ensure a security posture, fleetwide, stays compliant by monitoring security settings on…
N/A
Malwarebytes
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
Malwarebytes is a antimalware application for home and small businesses, which blocks viruses, malware, hackers, viruses, and malicious websites.
$119.99
per year 3 devices
Pricing
Jamf Protect
Malwarebytes
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Teams - Sole proprietor
$119.99
per year 3 devices
Teams - Boutique business
$399.99
per year 10 devices
Teams - Small office
$799.99
per year 20 devices
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Jamf Protect
Malwarebytes
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
All plans include a 60-day money back guarantee. 1st year discount available for the Small office plan.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Jamf Protect
Malwarebytes
Considered Both Products
Jamf Protect
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Jamf Protect
I find that all of the products have the same features; however, Jamf Protect is stronger if managing macOS devices. Also, it is one license so what you pay covers all of the features and does not require additional licenses for features like USB device control. The CIS …
Sophos was our main endpoint for all our windows and macOS devices. However with the newer releases of macOS Sophos started to become more problematic to deploy. Moving over to Jamf protect was the obvious choice and cost wise a lot more beneficial for us. It's monitoring and …
ESET was a massive resource hog and more often than not blocked legitimate things like creative cloud products. Admin interface was a nightmare to navigate and clunky to use. Delays in getting a stable product that worked on silicon and for new OS was an other major factor in …
In some aspects, Jamf Protect was far superior to the others mentioned above. The only downside I can see is that it is only macOS which could be a problem for hybrid environments.
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.
Sentinel One is streamlined, with a minimal resource footprint, and it appears to work well, offering slightly more comprehensive protection than Malwarebytes.
Mcafee usually takes a long time to scan each system as we usually have scheduled systems scan every weekend. But if we want to scan a particular system in minimal time we usually go with Malwarebytes to get the job done.
We have used Malwarebytes for many years. Originally, we used the free version but converted to the paid version. Now, we have five licenses, one for each of the staff members who are working remotely.
Proven to be one of the best in detecting malware that is otherwise undetected by other solutions. When a user gets hit by certain malware, many other tools do not even detect them as malware, while with Malwarebytes, you can rest assured that if it states that a computer is …
Malwarebytes Endpoint Protection is better than Webroot's Business Endpoint Protection in quite a few ways from the admin console to how effective the software works. Malwarebytes has a better admin GUI console in every way. Malwarebytes has detected malware that Webroot has not.
I found Sophos to be more resource intensive, scans take longer and affect the end user experience more. Building policies and customizations is not as intuitive with Sophos.
Malwarebytes beat the pricing we received from competing products like ESET and Bitdefender. Also, from looking at multiple reviews and ratings, Malwarebytes simply does a better job of protecting systems. It is easy to manage and maintain (sometimes information can be too …
I haven't used Norton, MacKeeper, nor any other anti-viral software for many years. I believe Malwarebytes is the most effective malware software available in its price range and have been extremely satisfied with it. Since using it I have had no issues nor incidents with …
Malwarebytes seems to lead the industry in customer focus. Their support team is superior. The breadth of services they offer is a major factor along with their roadmap for the future. I believe the update process is one of the easiest I've experienced with major software …
Malwarebytes is much better at detecting and mitigating non-traditional or virus-like attack vectors than any of the frontline anti-virus programs that we evaluated. As such, we chose to use Malwarebytes in tandem with a frontline anti-virus solution, providing us with two …
It's difficult to make a fair comparison because I use Bitdefender on a Mac rather than a PC. Bitdefender finds many suspicious emails that it can't remove or quarantine, so I have to remove them manually. Malwarebytes doesn't do that.
To be blunt, MB leaves them in the dust from an operative and functional perspective. We use them because we get great support for all functions and find they do an excellent job at what they are designed to do. Competitive costs and no extraneous fees. Software that tries to …
Ultimately, we chose to go with Malwarebytes in addition to other solutions because we felt it filled a small but critical void in our overall protection on our network and client systems. I can't say I would use the product on its own as it was built for a very specific role …
We've looked at other products but the ease of use, reviews and tests, and at this point, our own experience has led to us remaining with Malwarebytes instead of others. Cost is also a factor, Malwarebytes is reasonable comparatively when you look at what you get vs. what …
Simply put, Malwarebytes has been around for a long time and has yet to fail me. The consistency in which it operates on our devices and updates on its own without breaking itself means that I do not have to second guess if we are going to be protected properly or not. It …
It is also a very good option to consider as an antivirus system. But, it is not effective against the rootkits; that's why I selected Malwarebytes over it. Malware bytes has a more powerful and effective scanning mechanism than Norton. If I compare the free versions of the …
It's been a while since I made my decision to purchase Malwarebytes over the other products listed. I believe at the time Malwarebytes was the best product on my short list. I tried both AVG and Avast before deciding on Malwarebytes. Malwarebytes was also recommended to me by …
For me, there are no other alternatives compared to the free version of Malwarebytes. I used McAfee Total Protection as an alternative, it's a full product with anti-malware, anti-virus, anti-spam.
The main reason we went with Jamf Protect was because we wanted a dedicated macOS security endpoint. Is was easy to implement and migrate over from our previous endpoint provider. As a university we have lab macOS devices that multiple users use. So we have Jamf Protect profiles that block the use of external drives and other other profiles that allow it. We different user accounts requiring different access this can get a bit messy when deploying the config profiles at login for each user that signs in.
Now, I gave it that rating because it's a handy tool for diagnosing issues. Quarantining them, and most of the time, it does fix the problem. Though with rootkits, it's been hit or miss, and sometimes perfectly valid software gets flagged erroneously. However, once you've run it, it tends to run continuously, consuming far too many resources and being a real pain to uninstall, sometimes even causing issues.
The software is very good at working in the background without interfering with the end user in any way, there has never been a complaint of slowness on the machines or any excessive scan times because the users are unaware of it.
Malwarebytes management console is a very nice interface that tracks all of the machines on the network and shows which one is online, offline, up to date, out of date etc. I can also push installation packages to new machines without end user interaction.
Malwarebytes does extremely well what it is made to do, and that is to stop malware. Never once has any infection made it past malwarebytes to harm an end user machine.
Malwarebytes is always up to date, definitions are downloaded on a daily basis, you can trust that your software is current and you are being protected from the latest threats out there.
As of 2021 Q1, I have had issues with upgrading Malwarebytes installs on endpoints from the admin console. On about 30%-50% of the endpoints, I have to manually uninstall them, reboot, and reinstall Malwarebytes. This is a relatively new feature over the last year that Malwarebytes has done that let's you control updating the endpoint agent.
The last time we renewed Malwarebytes, we renewed for a 3 year renewal. That should describe the confidence we have in the product. Plus the cost savings impact year after year.
Jamf Protect is easy to manage. It is a separate interface from Jamf MDM which is nice for Security Operations teams. It allows Security teams to manage only the Security aspects without having to dig through all of the MDM configurations. For exception uses cases, Jamf Protect does provide options to customize settings where needed.
Usability-wise, it's pretty good, and it gets the job done. But once that's finished, the nags, the pop-ups, and the fact that it slows older systems down recklessly really cost it rating points. It becomes a clutter, and one of the first things we check when we receive reports that a PC is slow is whether it's running malware. Once we uninstall it, the PC is usually easily 40-50% faster. That's too much in the way of resources for something that wants to always run in the background.
I honestly haven't needed support for Malwarebytes because I haven't had any problems with it, whatsoever. I am giving it a 9 rating because I haven't actually had an encounter or experience with customer service or support, so it's hard to rate the actual support team since I've never had the privilege of coming into contact with them.
I find that all of the products have the same features; however, Jamf Protect is stronger if managing macOS devices. Also, it is one license so what you pay covers all of the features and does not require additional licenses for features like USB device control. The CIS compliance aspects generally look better in in Jamf as compared to Crowdstrike.
Malwarebytes seems to lead the industry in customer focus. Their support team is superior. The breadth of services they offer is a major factor along with their roadmap for the future. I believe the update process is one of the easiest I've experienced with major software platforms. You may be able to receive a discount if you purchase through a reseller / IT vendor.