Google Cloud Storage and Amazon EBS are leading cloud storage solutions with distinct advantages. Google Cloud Storage appears to have the upper hand in service integration and ease of use, while Amazon EBS is favored for performance and scalability.
Features: Google Cloud Storage is praised for its extensive service integration, simplified backup solutions, and seamless connectivity to Google's other cloud services. Amazon EBS stands out for high performance, scalability, and low-latency performance, making it ideal for data-intensive applications.
Room for Improvement: User reviews for Google Cloud Storage suggest enhancements in data transfer speeds, expanded support for more programming languages, and improved documentation. For Amazon EBS, users point out the need for a simplified management interface, better cost management features, and reduced latency during peak usage.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Google Cloud Storage offers a straightforward deployment process and receives positive feedback for its responsive customer support. Amazon EBS, while slightly more complex to deploy, provides comprehensive documentation and reliable support for troubleshooting.
Pricing and ROI: Google Cloud Storage is generally noted for its competitive pricing and excellent ROI, especially for small to medium-sized enterprises. Amazon EBS, although potentially higher in cost, justifies its price with superior performance, making it worthwhile for larger enterprises requiring high availability and performance.
As a cloud storage option, it is flexible and cost-effective, eliminating the need for a permanent investment in hard disks.
Enterprise support provides access to AWS developers 24/7.
They provide instant and chat support, addressing concerns in a timely manner.
Once subscribed, the support team is very responsive, connecting remotely to assist with troubleshooting.
We have self-studied to learn the services.
For SAP loads, Google provided a specific team, which resulted in good support.
I think the technical support by Google is good; the articles and troubleshooting are adequate.
Amazon EBS is easy to scale up or down as needed.
Vertical scaling can be achieved by adding additional volumes whenever the created storage is insufficient.
All cloud solutions permit scalability, and this is an important feature.
Google Cloud Storage is scalable, but there are limitations.
AWS provides infrastructure stability like data centers, ensuring high stability.
I have never had problems with its stability.
If the server is stable, then EBS is stable.
There was no direct experience with any instability during my involvement.
Regarding EBS, if an instance is terminated, the volume is also deleted, which leads to data loss.
I would like EBS to have no limitations, similar to stream-like block storage, which can accommodate an unlimited amount of sales.
Deployment is not easy as it requires server downtime to map newly created volumes, impacting operations during additional volume additions.
They cover a broad range of products, which might affect their ability to compete well in certain niches.
In the future, I would like to see additional features in Google Cloud Storage such as integrating Gemini to function as a chat for finding information, or OCR, or reading the content in my files for searching purposes.
For SSD IOPS, you only pay $0.125 per gigabyte.
The pay-for-what-you-use model justifies the amount paid, with no extra or hidden charges.
Users are charged only for the data used, not for the allocated volume.
Depending on your setup, Google Cloud Storage is economical, especially if you do not need high stability and scalability.
Google Cloud was cheaper compared to AWS and Azure.
Amazon EBS is also scalable and provides high availability.
EBS provides vertical scaling options to add additional volumes when more storage is required.
Amazon EBS allows seamless changes to the instance type without affecting application availability.
We do not experience any disruptions, and the service meets our needs and requirements.
The user interface of Google Cloud Storage is easy and consistent across all their products.
It has helped optimize costs because I store it in free tiers, resulting in no charge.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Google Cloud Storage | 4.3% |
| Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) | 2.9% |
| Other | 92.8% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 16 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 10 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 31 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 17 |
| Large Enterprise | 35 |
Amazon Elastic Block Store (Amazon EBS) provides persistent block level storage volumes for use with Amazon EC2 instances in the AWS Cloud. Each Amazon EBS volume is automatically replicated within its Availability Zone to protect you from component failure, offering high availability and durability. Amazon EBS volumes offer the consistent and low-latency performance needed to run your workloads. With Amazon EBS, you can scale your usage up or down within minutes – all while paying a low price for only what you provision.
Google Cloud Storage is praised for its fast performance, seamless integration, high security, and scalability. Users store and access large amounts of data easily, backup files, host websites, and collaborate on projects. The platform's reliability and cost-effectiveness make it a top choice for data storage and management.
We monitor all Cloud Storage 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.
