Google Cloud Reviews

We use Google Suite of products for enterprise and we build our technology products for warehouse management systems, and transportation management systems.

We use Google Cloud for our enterprise. It is used for pretty much everything from emails to storage and to communicate everything.

Google Cloud is very light. 

It is easy to use and has a very familiar interface.

I have used Microsoft and I have used Google. I feel equally comfortable with both, but Google is lighter and it's easy to work with on your mobile devices.

Google has a lot of features that are really good. I am happy with the features that Google offers.

As far as internal communications, Microsoft is much better because of the way it is structured. I feel more comfortable with Microsoft. 

I feel that the Google product is incomplete with regard to internal communications. It is an area that needs some improvement.

The user experience could be better. Microsoft user experience is better.

The compatibility of different devices could be better because it looks different on different devices, It's not the same.

I have been with the company for seven or eight months and it has been used for a long time before that. They have been using it from the start.

I am satisfied with the stability of Google Cloud.

Google Cloud is very scalable. Many companies use Google Cloud because of its scalability.

We have more than 30,000 users in our organization who are using Google Cloud.

I have not had any issues with the technical support in the eight months I have been using Google Cloud.

The initial setup is easy. It's quite straightforward.

I am not familiar with the pricing, but I would guess that it is probably cheaper than Microsoft Suite. There are a lot of startups that use Google Cloud.

We are a Google house, and we don't use any of the Microsoft products.

Google is fantastic and I think that people should go for it. I would recommend using Google Cloud.

I would rate Google Cloud a seven out of ten.

My primary use case is for cloud storage but I also use it for sharing documents with people who don't use Office 365. In my case, it's mainly for personal use and less for business. I'm a customer of Google Cloud. 

The storage is good and I think it's a good cloud source. I can access information from any client and from any device. It's convenient.

There are occasionally things which are inconvenient. For example, uploading pictures or files then requires you to transfer to a different folder. Maybe there's a way to choose where a document is uploaded to and that can be done directly. 

I've been using Google Cloud for a couple of years. 

The online documentation is very good and if I need help, I go to wiki and get a decent explanation. I've never been directly in touch with support. 

Licensing is paid on a monthly basis and I think the cost is reasonable. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

I am in the process of migrating from on-premises to the cloud.

We use it for IT infrastructure deployment and management.

The best part of Google Cloud is that it is cheaper than the competitors.

It is easy to set up, monitor, and manage.

You can just connect and start using it through a browser within a few minutes.

Monitoring and usage reporting could be improved. For example, they don't provide the CPU primary memory usage report. They do provide a CPU usage report, but not the memory. This is something that is critical for people interested in monitoring because if you are burdening the machine then you want the option of providing more RAM.

There is no graph or monitoring in the console; if it is there then I haven't found it, so it is something that takes extra time to figure out.

Google does not provide free support and at the least, email support should be available. I am not asking for free chat or telephone support, but given that we are paying to use the machine, email support should be included.

The alerts are somewhat cryptic and do not say much about what is going on.

I have been using Google Cloud for almost three years.

The stability is good.

Google Cloud is a scalable product.

The support is bad, and you have to purchase it separately. There is no free support available.

I am currently working with both Google Cloud and AWS. I am in the process of also trying to implement IBM Cloud.

It is easy to set up and up the time for provisioning depends on the type of machine that you want to set up. It will not take longer than 15 or 20 minutes if you know how to do it.

We have two or three people in the organization who set up the machines.

The support costs extra, even when it comes to email.

This is a good product, but I wouldn't immediately recommend it because there are a lot of options available. People have to choose based on their requirements and location. There is not much different, so people have to look at particular requirements, cost, and support.

I agree that cost is a factor but support should also be considered because it is needed from time to time, and Google does not provide free support. Given that we are paying for the machine, we should have to pay for costly support in addition to that.

This is a good product but I would like better monitoring, alerting, and reporting.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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.

We largely use the solution for hosting and for the database it offers.

Both the hosting and the database are the most valuable features on this product.

The analytics could be improved. I need to be able to give them to the client. It is there, but you have to go to Google Cloud to see it. I want it added as a service so I can add it to the client-side and make it easily sharable with my clients.

The management side for the database needs some work. Currently, you do everything from the app. It would be nice to have an interface where you can go in and maintain data and deal with records and do something online. Also the ability to migrate the database should be a bit easier. You can't just copy a database and make another duplicate. You have to do all that bit manually.

I've only been using the solution for a total of three months at this point.

So far, after three months, I can say it's very stable. I haven't had issues with bugs or glitches. It hasn't crashed at all.

This is a solution that's so easy to expand when you need to. It's the best I've ever seen. It's much better than Azure.

Everything in the few months we've used the solution has been great so we haven't had a need to contact technical support. I can't speak to how they are because I have never directly had to deal with them.

I've used Azure as well. I've used that for a while and now I've moved to Google Cloud. Then, for a client, I'm also going to use AWS.

We switched from Azure because the setup is too complex, and, on the scalability side, you have to set it up yourself and I found it didn't actually work well. You have to constantly monitor your server and then add a new VM. There's a lot more effort required which is unnecessary if you have a solution that cuts the workload down. Google simplifies things on many levels, and it does the scaling for you.

The initial setup isn't complex per se. It's simple once you understand it, but it takes some time to figure it out. Once you do, it's very simple afterwards. In our case, it took us two weeks to get everything fully operational.

We don't require any maintenance. We just need to make sure we keep our data clean.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't require any consultants or integrators to assist me.

The licensing for Google Cloud seems to be quite cheap and they're actually quite reasonable in comparison to Azure, which, as it turns out, is quite expensive. Even though Azure has a data center in South Africa it's still quite costly. There's no scaling, so if you go with the VM, you pay 2500 Rand. When you add another VM, it's another 2500 Rand even though you don't use the whole thing. With Google, you can go up as incrementally as you need to, even if it's just 30 Rand.

With Google, there's no licensing. Everything is included, just been based on the usage.

We're just a customer. We don't have any special connection to the company in any way.

Obviously, with Google, everything is the latest version. Google updates everything for you, so there isn't usually a time when we're on an "old version" of the solution.

We use the solution on a daily basis.

I would recommend Google Cloud. At the moment it's in third place, according to the standards. Right now it's ranked AWS, then Azure, then Google. Even though it's technically third, it's much better to use and it's a much better environment.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is for cloud network applications and for building artificial intelligence-based products.

I have found almost everything valuable. Most cloud products are moving in this direction, including artificial intelligence, blockchain, and security. 

Technical support needs help.

I have been using Google Cloud for three and half years now.

When it comes to vendor reliability Google Cloud is extremely stable.

Google Cloud is scalable and we have over one thousand users with plans to increase that number.

Customer service and support needs some work.

Everything was easy and straightforward in the setup process.

Compared to Azure Cloud, Google Cloud is more expensive but it is okay.

I would definitely recommend Google Cloud they are performing much better than Azure Cloud. I would rate Google Cloud a seven out of ten.

I have been using Google Cloud for personal learning and personal interest.

I use the non-SQL Firebase Realtime Database. I install, apply a database, and install my mobile data globally.

I have been using Google Cloud for approximately one year.

Google Cloud is 100 percent stable.

I have not analyzed the stability of Google Cloud, but for what I use it for it has been good.

Sometimes the Google documents are difficult to learn from. Amazon has better support material.

I rate the support from Google Cloud a three out of five.

I have started using the Amazon Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud for comparative reasons. For my use case, Google Cloud was the best choice.

I would recommend Google Cloud to others.

I rate Google Cloud a seven out of ten.

We use Google Cloud for storage, infrastructure, and services. It provides file storage and infrastructure for deploying virtual machines, Kubernetes, or Dockers. We also use it for Google services that can be accessed by other software. Our company currently has about 60 users, and we plan to increase usage in the future. 

I've worked with Google Cloud for five years.

To discuss stability, we need to talk about specific services or infrastructure. Google Cloud has low downtime, but some services are slower, while others are faster. It depends on what you are talking about. It's stable on average. 

I consider Azure more secure than Google and Amazon because of all its certifications, but Google is secure enough and improving. 

Google Cloud could be cheaper.

I rate Google Cloud eight out of 10. It's not something I would recommend for everyone. It depends on the needs.