Google Cloud Reviews

I use Google Cloud to spin up the Kubernetes cluster.

The solution is user-friendly and easy to spin.

The security of the solution can always be improved.

I have been using the solution for two years.

Google Cloud is stable.

The scalability of Google Cloud is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. All we have to do is make our request and the cluster should be available to us.

Google Cloud offers free credit when we sign up for a minimal amount of gigabytes. The service is cheap and I give it a seven out of ten for the cost.

For learning purposes, I explored both AWS and Azure on my own, and I have also used other cloud environments. When I originally started out in the cloud industry, this was my basic approach.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend Google Cloud to others.

We are migrating some of our application workloads from an on-premise system to Google Cloud using Kubernetes.

Google Cloud's most valuable attribute is its capability for on-demand auto-scaling, and it also simplifies numerous intricate tasks for its users.

The price of the solution could be more transparent.

I have used Google Cloud within the last 12 months.

I rate the stability of Google Cloud a nine out of ten.

I rate the scalability of Google Cloud a seven out of ten.

I have not used the support from Google Cloud.

The initial setup of Google Cloud is straightforward. However, the migration of workload is complex.

We approached Google Cloud with certain cost assumptions but were surprised to find that our actual expenses were higher than expected. Initially, we had anticipated spending a set amount on the solution, but in reality, we ended up spending more than that. It would be helpful to have greater transparency and educational documentation on the cost-related aspects of Google Cloud.

My advice to others wanting to use this solution should have a migration strategy and there are other solutions on the market with similar features. User education is critical to be successful with the solution.

One of the challenges when it comes to Google Cloud is how to familiarize traditional Java developers, working database administrators, or data engineers with its offerings. The question is how to teach them to use it effectively and ensure that it functions properly. If the education is successful, Google Cloud can be a fantastic solution to work with.

I rate Google Cloud a nine out of ten.

We've been using it for a couple of school projects here. We have implemented it for a lot of schools with Google as our infrastructure. They're using Firebase for their data. 

It's a nice product overall. 

The solution scales well.

There's no installation process to contend with.

It is stable. 

The pricing overall is very reasonable. 

It has been secure overall. 

Overall, I'm happy with it. It's not missing any features. 

We'd like the storage to be increased. 

We've been using the solution for the last couple of years.

The stability is quite good. There are no issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The scalability is awesome. We don't have to do the heavy lifting of maintaining the infrastructure, or anything, as everything is bundled up by Google. We just have to apply a code, and then we have to run it.

We have about 1,000 users on the product right now and plan to increase usage in the future. 

Support has been good overall. We have been satisfied with their level of assistance. 

Positive

We're using Google and Google-related products, including Kubernetes. Those are the current products here.

We were previously using other clouds for other purposes, however, in our latest project, Google Cloud met all of our needs. 

There is no installation to speak of as the product is in the cloud. 

We pay for the service yearly.

We find it to be cheaper than the competitors. They have a pay-as-you-go model.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

These cases involve infrastructure services, such as creating virtual machines in the cloud. A notable use case is creating a DR server or hosting a centralized authentication tool like Microsoft AD or an LDAP server. These should run on the cloud because it provides a high level of availability. When creating a DR, it should be on the cloud to ensure accessibility from any location and protection against various threats, such as power outages, resource constraints, viruses, hackers, or physical attacks.

Thus, DR should always be on the cloud, while production services can run on-premises. Authentication servers and critical data backups should also be on the cloud for secure and global accessibility. For instance, the backup of a primary application server should be stored on the cloud to ensure it is secure and accessible from anywhere in the world.

Every cloud provider, such as Google Cloud, offers analytics capabilities through their dashboards. These dashboards can be configured to display the data you require. Some features are available by default, while others can be created according to your needs.

Google Cloud should provide more introductory videos on how to get started. Currently, very few of these resources are available. Additionally, training on Google Cloud products is not very well streamlined. Users have to search for training, which can be quite complex.

Google Cloud needs to enhance the intuitiveness of its portal because new users might not be familiar with the workflows. To help users get acquainted with fundamental operations, Google Cloud should offer a basic introductory course free of charge. Microsoft Azure excels in this area, providing excellent documentation and free introductory learning videos.

I have been using the product for five years. 

The tool is very stable.

The tool is immensely scalable. 

The setup is somewhat intuitive but could be more user-friendly. 

For commercial purposes, users need to pay for the products they use on a workload basis, not a license basis. There are two pricing models: fixed monthly and pay-as-you-go. In the pay-as-you-go model, users pay for the resources they use, while in the fixed monthly model, they have 24/7 access to resources for a set monthly fee.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. When choosing a cloud provider, users must consider their use cases and Opex. If certain use cases can only be fulfilled by Google Cloud, then Google Cloud is the necessary choice. However, if any cloud provider can address the use cases, users should compare costs and choose the most cost-effective option. Users need to balance their requirements between use cases and costs.

Users should familiarize themselves with all the major cloud providers and their competitive features and advantages. The three major providers in India are AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. Users should conduct a competitive analysis to understand each provider's unique features. I advise users to explore and compare these features before choosing a cloud provider.

The primary use case of this solution is for storage and document sharing.

For example, if I have a customer and they want to share a document, I can access it through Google.

Ubiquiti is what is most valuable. They have basically mimicked Microsoft, giving you the equivalent of Office 365 type of services that are available.

It's robust, and it has a wide reach in terms of office applications including storage.

It's easy to access in a public cloud environment.

Every once in a while I have trouble accessing it, but I don't know if that's a function of the Cloud, the way the Cloud is set up, or it's just something on my browser. 

Stability could be improved in terms of the Cloud in general administration. It's frustrating when companies have to deal with Cloud Administration. 

Change configuration management is an issue. I can envision customer companies that are Cloud-enabled where their biggest problem is having to keep up with the changes and managing it.

The API is constantly evolving. IP addresses are constantly changing and it's hard to keep up with all of those changes.

Typically it is being administered through IT organizations, although they have no visibility.

If you engage in a security solution through a cloud provider, you have no view, it's all faith, trust, and hope.

How do you reconcile the two, to provide the visibility, do it seamlessly, and make it easy to use?

If they could include a popup section where all of the new updates are. That would be helpful. I don't have the experience or intelligence to know what it is that they are showing, or where I can get that I might need, which would make a feature like this important.

It would like it if upon starting the browser, it tells you that it is out of date and asks if you would like to update. That would lead customers to take the optimal path as opposed to having to figure it out themselves.

There are issues with stability. There may be capacity issues at the time but it's hard to guess what the root cause is. There is no visibility.  You don't have the visibility unless you really know upfront what your problem is. Otherwise, you are left hanging.

It's scalable, but I don't plan to increase my usage. Personally, I avoid a public cloud offering system from a security perspective unless it's something a customer requires to access documents.

Prior to the public cloud, I used another solution more like a public hosting-type of service. It didn't give you the scale and the means of payment that you have with the Cloud. As an example, look at Lotus Notes, 1980 technology. There is no comparison, Google is far superior. People see the ease, simplicity, and again the Ubiquiti of the service attached to it.

The initial setup is simple. You go in there and you register. It starts with your email address and then you are done.

We provide private networks, what we call VPNs. It is the older, traditional VPN type service for our customers, which gives them security and performance metrics that you can't get from the internet.

We have a gen engine that has that interface into the cloud providers including Google.

We don't by services from Google, we are not even doing infrastructures, or platform as a service or software as a service.

We are not using this solution in my organization. We have our own internal storage for security reasons, and predominantly, we use it in-house. We call it orange, it's flex storage. It's our intranet.

We either use in-house or have exclusive arrangements with companies.

The concept of the cloud is great, you have the scale, you have the financial model, metered pay as you go, those are great, but what's worse is that it's a black box.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Google Cloud is perceived as a cost-effective and user-friendly option, especially compared to AWS. The current affordability and ease of use make it suitable for medium-sized companies. While the complexity may increase in the future, for now, Google Cloud is considered easy to use.

The product should be more cost-effective. 

I have been using the product for six years. 

The product is stable. 

My company has more than 1000 users. 

The tool's deployment is not complex. 

Google Cloud's deployment can be done in-house. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. Various factors come into play when considering the adoption of Google Cloud. Cost is a significant consideration, but it's not the sole factor. The availability of skilled developers in the market, technology support, scalability for future growth, and the range of products offered are also crucial. Additionally, the ease of finding Google Cloud-certified developers and the level of support from the company or vendor contribute to the decision-making process.

I use the solution to deploy .NET applications to the cloud. I deploy Web APIs and console applications.

Cloud Run is pretty helpful. Pub/Sub is also helpful.

The product must provide support for .NET. Microsoft has support for .NET because .NET is a Microsoft product. We ran into an issue when we were waiting for Google to support .NET 6. Google is slower to support .NET. It must cater more to .NET developers.

I have been using the solution for one year.

I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. We rarely had issues. We run our applications on Cloud Run. We had a feature in our software where we had to generate an Excel report, and it limited us to 32 megabytes. We had to work around it.

I rate the tool’s scalability a nine out of ten. Probably 100 users are using the solution in our organization.

We were using Azure before.

The initial setup is fairly easy. We have a tool called Jenkins to deploy the product. It only takes a few minutes.

The solution is cheaper than Azure.

Google Cloud came late to the game, so it's not used as much as AWS. We can give it a try because it's easy. It’s easy to configure. It gives us another option. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for small applications. There are also a few web applications with Angular.

I'm very happy with Google Cloud. Everything works. For us, the solution is very easy to use. We have the right skillsets for it.

Users find it easy to work with it. 

I don't need to create an API layer since it automatically creates it for me.

It offers a real-time database, so we get updates really fast.

The Firebase database is great.

The tutorials people can find online are good.

The solution offers fair pricing.

It's pretty stable.

The solution can scale well.

It offers a simple initial setup.

There is only one issue that I have and it is when you create an account, they limit the number of accounts you can create.

The documentation could be better.

The backup needs improvement. I would prefer to do a one-piece backup solution where I can schedule backups.

It's just too complicated to migrate from one Firebase database to another. It should have been easy.

I'd like to see something like an exchange server, a managed email server, where I can handle other clients. I'd like something similar to Microsoft Exchange yet something that is like a fully managed email service.

I started using the solution maybe four years ago.

The stability has been great. I'd rate it ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I've had no issues. 

It's a very scalable solution. I'd rate its ability to expand at a ten out of ten. 

We took a managed server, so it automatically scales. We've had a case where there were a thousand users streaming videos, and it all works fine.

We have 1200 users for one application. That said, we have a few applications and they all have varying amounts of users. It's likely around 1,000 users per app.

It's in our roadmap to increase usage.

I have tried Google support. I did send emails and never got a response for some of them. Compared to AWS, AWS has the best technical support and Google's is weaker.

Positive

We're also using AWS.

For Angular apps and for real-time apps and for real-time apps, Google Cloud is much better. When it comes to cleaning lambdas and small APIs, AWS is better. And the only thing I would say AWS is better is technical support. The support is 24 hours, and they're always ready to help. Google is less expensive, however.

The solution is straightforward to set up. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. It's a cloud product. It's very easy.

Once you know what to do, the deployment is very quick and really easy. It's like one command line that you do to deploy. It only takes a minute.

We've got a repo. However, the deployments are done manually with just one command. They build locally and deploy manually.

Just one person managed the deployment process. 

Everything is implemented in-house. We did not need outside assistance. I was able to handle the deployment myself. 

Something that used to take six months might now only take two weeks. That's quite a change and a pretty good ROI.

I'd rate the pricing ten out of ten. It is an affordable product.

The cost might be $10 a month per user, which is about $300 a month in total.

We're a customer. 

I'm using a few of the services. I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd advise new users to go through some tutorials. The documentation can be a bit hard to read. However, there are a lot of good tutorials out there. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.