We performed a comparison between Jamf Pro and Kandji based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about JAMF, Microsoft, Kandji and others in Mobile Device Management (MDM)."Technical support, in general, has been quite helpful."
"It has improve our organization through the remote management of non-domain joined devices."
"One of the biggest advantages of Microsoft Intune is that it brings the management of Windows, macOS, iOS, Android, and even Linux under a single pane of glass."
"It's not working perfectly, but Microsoft's Autopilot offers great visibility into automated deployment solutions."
"The stability of Microsoft Intune is good."
"Intune is effective because of the configuration management and endpoint security it provides. The graphical interface makes it easier to configure and deploy devices."
"We have not experienced any bugs or glitches with this solution."
"It's normally able to meet 100% expectations of our customers."
"The zero-day support regarding new Apple hardware and Apple operating systems is very good."
"From the reviews that we are getting, the feedback from the client, the tool is very good on the Jamf side - especially for the Macs."
"We have been able to successfully manage applications and inventory within our machines."
"Jamf Pro is the only product we can use at the moment because they are ahead of their competitors in zero-touch deployment for the end-user. Jamf Pro has a self-service feature that has helped us minimize our support cases. That's a feature the customers like very much."
"The ability to put a device into a lost mode state that will report locations as it checks in has allowed us to retrieve so many lost devices."
"The solution has good integration with Google and has high performance for our Mac fleet of devices."
"The time that we save in hours for new deployments, redeployments, application upgrades and OS upgrades more than makes up for the cost of the product."
"Self Service empowers the user and allows them to install the software they need when they need it."
"It's a very easy plug-and-play solution where you can just enroll the devices and choose the features you want."
"The feature that allows us to import the business application from the configuration manager to Intune is not very good at this time."
"When somebody has a customized application or their own company's application, we cannot deploy that application."
"Lacks the ability to deploy more ways of management, managing devices and processing the policies."
"We need the capabilities of the Cloud Management Gateway (CMG) to be enhanced through Intune instead of Azure."
"Enhancements for managing MacOS more comprehensively would be beneficial."
"The main disadvantage seen today is regarding Linux clients. We have a lot of development resources that have Linux on their clients, and we can't manage them on the same platform, as we do with other clients such as macOS and Windows. So, it should have support for Linux clients. It should also have better support for macOS."
"The most important thing is reporting. They should improve their reporting. They should give a free hand to users. In SCCM, I can create my own reports. For example, in SCCM, I can create an inventory report for my PC or for all PCs, but in Intune, we don't have an option to create any report. Microsoft claims that Intune is a successor of SCCM, but SCCM is more powerful than Intune. So, they should develop Intune more and make it equivalent to SCCM. Then, their product will be great in the market."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy custom packages as a Windows 64-bit package, as opposed to the Windows 32-bit, which is the only one available now."
"The product is pretty good as-is, but if anything could be improved I would say the UI could perhaps be a bit simpler. A mobile app to complement the web-based version, to perform specific tasks, would be nice to have - a good example of what I mean is the "Pulseway" MDM for Windows, they have a very useful and user-friendly mobile app."
"The on-going improvements & innovation that Jamf provides over time is something that needs to be maintained, as it is what is needed to fulfill a business & team need at the right time."
"For patch management in Jamf, two Smart Groups are required as patch policies cannot be scoped as of now. This is not a major issue, as there is a great workaround by using a wrapped "member of" duplicate Smart Group. However, being able to avoid two Smart Groups for patch management would be nice."
"The integrated patch feature is good but needs some tweaking."
"Currently, you need to scroll through pages and pages of icons (we have many icons that have been uploaded), and it can be tedious."
"Jamf Pro could be improved by providing more out-of-the-box integration with other systems such as Active Directory, Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions, and other IT management tools."
"In some places, GUI could be more reactive."
"I would love to see an integrated ticketing system built-in, better reporting templates to help analyze the data (software usage, etc.), and integration with FREE SSL Cert (letsencrypt.org) with auto-renewal."
"Kandji should give open customization."
Jamf Pro is ranked 1st in Mobile Device Management (MDM) with 103 reviews while Kandji is ranked 4th in Mobile Device Management (MDM) with 1 review. Jamf Pro is rated 9.6, while Kandji is rated 7.0. 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 Kandji writes "An easy-to-manage and deploy solution, but it should provide open customization". Jamf Pro is most compared with VMware Workspace ONE, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, SOTI MobiControl, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM), whereas Kandji is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Open EDR and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.
See our list of best Mobile Device Management (MDM) vendors and best Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) vendors.
We monitor all Mobile Device Management (MDM) 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.