We compared Microsoft Azure and Google App Engine based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Microsoft Azure is praised for its scalability, reliability, customer service, pricing, and return on investment. On the other hand, Google App Engine is appreciated for its scalability, easy deployment process, infrastructure, customer service, pricing, and return on investment. The main difference lies in Azure's extensive range of services and flexibility, while App Engine could benefit from improvements in scalability and performance optimization.
Features: Microsoft Azure is highly praised for its scalability, versatility, reliability, and extensive range of services. In contrast, Google App Engine stands out for its easy deployment process, strong infrastructure, automatic scaling, and efficient datastore. It also seamlessly integrates with other Google services.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Microsoft Azure is praised for its ease and simplicity, according to user feedback. Users find the licensing terms flexible and varied. On the other hand, Google App Engine has minimal and straightforward setup cost, making implementation easy. Its pricing is considered cost-effective and well-suited for users' needs., Microsoft Azure has been praised for its cost savings, improved efficiency, and scalability. It offers a diverse range of services and tools. On the other hand, Google App Engine is known for its positive ROI, increased efficiency, and seamless integration with other Google products. Users also reported time and resource savings.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure users have provided feedback on areas that require improvement, while Google App Engine users have suggested enhancements in scalability, performance, resource allocation, latency issues, flexibility in configuration, and deployment options.
Deployment and customer support: Microsoft Azure users have provided varying feedback on the time required for deployment, setup, and implementation phases, with some mentioning a three-month deployment period and an additional week for setup. Other users mention a one-week timeframe for both deployment and setup. Careful evaluation of the context is crucial for accurately assessing implementation duration. Similarly, users of Google App Engine also reported different timeframes for deployment, setup, and implementation. Some mentioned three months for deployment and an extra week for setup, while others reported one week for both. Considering the specific context is essential to evaluate the duration of each phase accurately., In terms of customer service, Microsoft Azure receives positive feedback for its responsiveness and expertise. Users appreciate the prompt and helpful assistance in resolving technical issues, as well as the availability of comprehensive documentation. On the other hand, Google App Engine also has highly regarded customer service, with users appreciating the responsiveness, effectiveness, and reliability of the support team. They find the promptness in addressing queries and the knowledgeable guidance offered by customer service representatives to be satisfactory.
The summary above is based on 27 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Azure and Google App Engine users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Its ability to integrate with most devices helps users who have different or old devices."
"The product's setup and deployment phases are easy."
"The solution is serverless, so we don't have to operate it."
"Seurity features - unauthorized individuals are unable to access certain applications."
"Administering App Engine is simple; it has intuitive UIs and a very scalable app engine."
"The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day."
"The WhatApp feature is the most valuable."
"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."
"Azure offers broad compatibility with both structured and unstructured data. For example, we use PostgreSQL for storing Azure's official data and manage various types of data, including tabular and image data, accommodating the storage of all data types we handle. So, in many ways, Azure simplified the data storage and management needs."
"We've found the solution to be extremely flexible."
"One feature I like in Microsoft Azure is its ability to host and run applications on virtual machines. It is a basic yet crucial capability for our team."
"Azure services like EDM and Batch are all famous, but one of the most popular services for development is Azure Functions, especially the PaaS option. Depending on a customer's environment, they can go for the PaaS."
"The solution is similar to a plug-and-play system, it is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the possibility of using Microsoft and non-Microsoft services on one environment."
"Azure virtual machines are stand-out."
"Microsoft Azure is easy to use."
"The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."
"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."
"Some features of runtime don't work well in App Engine."
"I would like a simpler deployment tool on laptops. It is a bit complicated at the moment. We know how to do it, but it could be easier to deploy it on laptops."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Data consumption of the device could be improved."
"There needs to be more directions in terms of how to use the solution."
"I am limited to sending a photo to five people. I want to be able to send a photo to many people, not just five."
"Ease of use could be improved."
"It can be improved in terms of ease of billing or monitoring of the billing. That gets to be a little difficult."
"The pricing can be reduced."
"There is a need to be better on-premise solutions that are more helpful. However, I don't think that is the goal of Microsoft Azure. They want the solution to be secure cloud solutions with cloud applications. This is their main goal at the moment."
"It should have a better hybrid-cloud central analysis. Their support service also needs to be improved. Our main concern is support calls. Our issue is basically related to the technical functionality of the services that we use. It doesn't behave as expected, and support often fails to solve the problem."
"Could be more user friendly; initial setup is difficult to understand."
"Difficult to understand how it works and it's an expensive solution."
"The tool should add an interface that is similar to AWS."
Google App Engine is ranked 11th in PaaS Clouds with 23 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 299 reviews. Google App Engine is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Google App Engine writes "Simplifies app development process for businesses". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". Google App Engine is most compared with Amazon AWS, Heroku, IBM Cloud Private, IBM Public Cloud and Amazon Lightsail, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Pivotal Cloud Foundry and Salesforce Platform. See our Google App Engine vs. Microsoft Azure 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.