We performed a comparison between Google App Engine and SAP Cloud Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two PaaS Clouds solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Administering App Engine is simple; it has intuitive UIs and a very scalable app engine."
"The product's setup and deployment phases are easy."
"It is simple to use. It is much simpler than AWS. It is also very powerful."
"Its ability to integrate with most devices helps users who have different or old devices."
"Google App Engine's most valuable feature is self-management. You do not have to manage the infrastructure underneath where all the functions are happening, such as load balancing deployment and version management, they are managed by the system itself."
"The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day."
"I've found that all of the features are valuable, especially the shared drive and the ability for multiple people to use their documents at the same time."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, considering that there is good documentation explaining the implementation part of it."
"The solution has a lot of great features."
"The maintenance part can be outsourced easily."
"The product is very stable."
"SAP Cloud Platform's most valuable features are its exhaustiveness, scalability with minimum maintenance, and functionality."
"We primarily utilize SAP's ERP capabilities."
"The solution can scale."
"The most valuable feature is integration."
"The most valuable features of SAP Cloud Platform are security integration and scalability."
"Data consumption of the device could be improved."
"There needs to be more directions in terms of how to use the solution."
"Some features of runtime don't work well in App Engine."
"I think there's still a lot that can be done with Google Meet and the video conferencing part of it. It could be more dynamic in terms of what can be done with it."
"The only concern is that there is a number of the offerings which are built on their own proprietary technologies. With some of the offerings in Google Cloud, it's difficult to have a path to migrate to other cloud providers."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The documentation and community are lacking for this product."
"The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."
"What I would like to see improved is the learning curve."
"I would like to see more and better support for data transformations."
"From what I understand, the SAP Cloud Platform is for implementation on AWS or Azure, and it's not meant to be a full-fledged cloud solution, so while using the platform, an area for improvement is that it has fewer offerings and is less flexible when compared to AWS. AWS has a lot more flexibility than the SAP Cloud Platform. I've also used Azure in college and AWS in between, and I prefer AWS over the SAP Cloud Platform. The only reason I would ever stick with the SAP Cloud Platform is to create applications integrated with SAP or with other companies within SAP, such as SuccessFactors. When you go into the SAP Cloud Platform web page, it's a bit bland and has relatively limited offerings. For example, there doesn't seem to be in-house MongoDB support, but I realize there's in-house support for the PostgreSQL database, so there are fewer offerings in the SAP Cloud Platform. Yes, you can always go for a database on the actual MongoDB server rather than depending on the offerings of the SAP Cloud Platform. However, it's still better to support MongoDB from the platform, so payment is consolidated, rather than going to a different location to make a payment. Another room for improvement in the SAP Cloud Platform is the need to create an SAP subaccount if you need to use the platform unless you have an SSO login by Google or if you're using a different identity provider such as Microsoft or Google. Instead of requiring dependency on SAP, it would be good if users could use the SAP Cloud Platform even without a subaccount on SAP. For example, when hosting an application on AWS or Azure, you don't have to create an account in Amazon or Microsoft. You can still do it using Google. You can use almost anything, so I'd like SAP to improve by removing the dependency, particularly the requirement to create an SAP account to use the SAP Cloud Platform."
"They are still developing this product. It does not really have 100% of the necessary features available to properly service business clients"
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements with the price and the licensing."
"The areas I think this solution should improve are monitoring and adapting."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The current pricing model is credit-based. We would like to have more information about the usage of the existing applications."
Google App Engine is ranked 11th in PaaS Clouds with 23 reviews while SAP Cloud Platform is ranked 6th in PaaS Clouds with 38 reviews. Google App Engine is rated 8.2, while SAP Cloud Platform is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Google App Engine writes "Simplifies app development process for businesses". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP Cloud Platform writes "Provides seamless integration with CTI for streamlined data synchronization but complexity and challenges in migrating existing applications to the low-code model for custom application development". Google App Engine is most compared with Microsoft Azure, Amazon AWS, Heroku, IBM Cloud Private and Amazon Lightsail, whereas SAP Cloud Platform is most compared with Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, webMethods.io Integration and Mule Anypoint Platform. See our Google App Engine vs. SAP Cloud Platform report.
See our list of best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all PaaS Clouds 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.