Last week, Proton unveiled its new software suite, which the company aims to use primarily to compete with Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. Proton places a high priority on privacy, but does it truly offer a complete alternative to what Big Tech offers?
Even before the launch of Workspace and Meet, Proton already offered various apps for (business) users. Think of their email app, as well as alternatives to Microsoft Excel and Google Sheets, such as Proton Docs. A limitation of the Proton suite is already apparent: the lack of a full-fledged PowerPoint equivalent. Organizations use these tools regularly and, when migrating, must therefore make do without a comparable solution from Proton. Even without the change in file formats, this already creates friction during a transition.
With Google or Microsoft, a central server processes all changes within the productivity suite. With Proton, however, that server is “blind” due to encryption. Changes to images and animations must therefore be calculated and synchronized on the user’s own computer. This requires more processing power than the American competition and advanced software logic.
And, once again, facilitating a smoothly functioning PowerPoint alternative without sacrificing privacy is technically far more challenging than, for example, a Word alternative, since Proton does provide an application in the latter case.
Proton introduces fully encrypted business suite
Zero-knowledge-based architecture
The crucial difference between Proton and better-known providers lies in the trust architecture. Whereas Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace rely on encryption where the provider manages the keys, Proton employs a strict zero-knowledge model. This means that parties like Microsoft or Google could potentially grant themselves access to the data, for example, for indexing or AI training.
All data in the Proton Workspace, from email traffic to Drive document storage, is encrypted on the client side. This is intended to reduce the risk of attacks and large-scale server-side data breaches. From a legal perspective, the fact that the company is based in Europe and operates here also provides an additional layer of protection. As a result, the U.S. government cannot request this data because it does not fall under the U.S. CLOUD Act. Google and Microsoft were founded in the United States, are based there, and therefore do fall under U.S. jurisdiction.
They (and other U.S. vendors) counter this by citing various measures intended to safeguard sovereignty. These include the logical separation of cloud environments, the separation of European staff, and the simple promise that the cloud provider will challenge any court order. None of this has been legally tested yet, which gives Proton an advantage. Even though it is not technically an EU-based alternative, it is at least not American.
Europe pays 265 billion euros for digital dependency
Network security via dedicated IP and VPN
Where Proton stands out from similar services is the seamless integration of a business VPN with dedicated IP addresses directly within the suite. This once again highlights the emphasis on privacy. As a result, IT administrators can enforce a “virtual office” with minimal configuration. SaaS services such as Salesforce are fully shielded from external traffic via IP whitelisting. This blocks the category of hacks where stolen login credentials are misused from remote locations. Proton makes robust network security accessible without requiring complex external network infrastructure.
With Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace, this approach is significantly more fragmented. By default, these providers do not offer a VPN service with their office suites to provide individual employees with a fixed IP address. Microsoft 365 requires similarly complex security configurations within the Azure and Entra environments.
Google Workspace users must rely on third-party VPN providers to obtain a dedicated IP address. While Microsoft and Google rely on a complex “Zero Trust” model in which security primarily occurs at the application level, Proton opts for a more tangible approach. By integrating a VPN with a fixed IP address directly into the suite, the network itself becomes the first line of defense. For an IT administrator, this means that access to corporate data is simply blocked at the network level for anyone outside the trusted “environment.” That’s a lot more straightforward than managing countless separate access rules.
Identity management and password manager
Proton Workspace also integrates its own Proton Pass password manager. It goes beyond mere storage. The built-in functionality for email aliases allows IT departments, among other things, to restrict the use of the primary business email address with external services. This acts as an effective firewall against phishing. It also prevents a third-party data breach from directly leading to the exposure of the primary corporate identity.
With their suites, Microsoft and Google are fully committed to Single Sign-On, where a primary business account serves as the universal key for all external tools. While this offers convenience in management, it lacks a built-in layer of anonymization. They do not offer an alternative to email aliases as Proton does. As a result, the actual business address remains the unique identifier everywhere. This not only increases the risk of targeted phishing but also exposes your business identity to the public immediately when an external party is compromised.
Additionally, password management is deeply embedded in the browser at Google and Microsoft. While Proton acts as an isolation layer that masks your actual data, the two competitors opt for a transparent model where convenience and centralized monitoring take precedence over individual anonymity. For an IT department, this means that, with the major players, you have less control over the “digital footprint” employees leave outside your organization.
Functional considerations: AI and productivity
Despite its strong security offerings, Proton Workspace certainly has functional limitations compared to Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. As mentioned, there is currently no full-fledged alternative to Microsoft PowerPoint or Google Slides.
Any discussion of these suites today must address AI. While Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini are deeply integrated for complex data analysis, Proton has taken a more conservative approach with its Lumo AI. The focus of that model is on local processing to ensure privacy. This results in an assistant that is functionally less powerful than models trained on public and private user datasets.
Proton’s suite has now been expanded with Meet for end-to-end encrypted video communication. This makes the suite more complete, but integration with third-party applications is complex. This is due to the nature of encryption, which makes integrating Google and Microsoft’s alternatives much easier to achieve.
Price Comparison
When we compare the prices of Proton, Microsoft, and Google, it’s clear that the entry-level price of Proton Workspace (€12.99) is significantly higher than that of the competition. Microsoft charges €5.20 per user per month for its Business Basic subscription. Google Starter costs €6.80 per person per month.
In the mid-range segment, the rates converge, with Proton’s €12.99 subscription competing with Microsoft’s Business Standard plan at €10.80. Google offers its “Standard” subscription for €13.60 per month per user.
If you opt for the most comprehensive worksuite subscription, the price differences are minimal. Proton Premium (at 19.99 euros per month per person) positions itself between Microsoft Business Premium and Google Plus, which cost 19.10 euros and 21.10 euros per person per month, respectively.
What should I choose as a business?
Proton Workspace does not position itself as the most feature-rich suite, but as the most secure. For sectors where intellectual property, legal confidentiality, or data security are priorities, Proton certainly offers a noteworthy alternative.
Choosing Proton is a strategic decision, but at this point, it’s certainly not the most logical choice for every business. For instance, the AI assistant is nowhere near as good as the competition’s, and the lack of applications that competitors offer is a deal-breaker for many companies.
Costs also play a major role for many companies, and the most affordable subscriptions are offered by the Big Tech duo. Thus, it’s not just ease of use, maturity, and the number of features and applications that matter, but also the price. Extra privacy, it turns out, requires compromises on many fronts.