Compare Amazon AWS vs. Google Firebase
Amazon AWS is ranked 1st in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 9 reviews while Google Firebase is ranked 3rd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 5 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 9.2, while Google Firebase is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Perfect for startups and easy to implement but offers a confusing amount of tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Firebase writes "Real-time change triggers and push notifications enhance our product functionality and offering". Amazon AWS is most compared with OpenShift, IBM Cloud, SAP Cloud Platform, Pivotal Cloud Foundry and Oracle Cloud Platform, whereas Google Firebase is most compared with Microsoft Azure, DigitalOcean, Oracle Cloud, Alibaba Cloud and Jelastic. See our Amazon AWS vs. Google Firebase report.
Most Helpful Review | |
 Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon AWS vs. Google Firebase and other solutions. Updated: July 2020. 426,043 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
The most valuable features are load balancers, databases, and S3 buckets. The solution offers a low footprint. We don't have to come up with a data center ourselves. We basically don't have to own any hardware. We just rent a slice of their platform and we have everything we need. As a service vendor, we have helped clients to achieve faster "go to market" on their products, and have provided highly flexible cost-effective system management solutions. We have seen an improvement in our infrastructure, as the code makes it very easy to deploy quickly to AWS. Their technical support is really good. I am very satisfied. With the pay-as-you-go model, we don't have to predict future IT needs. We can just scale up as we want. That helps with a lot of agility in deploying stuff in our IT infrastructure. They release new solutions almost every quarter and you don't get that kind of innovation from an enterprise company. It offers durability, high availability, fault tolerance, and a high TCO benefit. | The Realtime Database feature is the most important for us since we are able to see changes in the database the moment they are happening. The user interface is very good and easy to navigate. The most valuable feature I like is about the realtime. Updates are also very fast. I found the flexibility of handling and dealing with database through EDL to be very useful. The main feature for us is that the tools are all in one place and that you don't need to bother with the backend system and the infrastructure. |
Cons | |
There are some limitations for certain applications that happen regionally and it is an issue for us. They should really consolidate and make things simpler rather than offer you hundreds of random options. The way everything is arranged really forces users to figure out everything on their own and then, on top of that, to calculate the total costs. There's an infinite number of combinations even just with cost calculations. It's just too much. This solution would be improved with the inclusion of hybrid Kubernetes management. An easier way to determine estimated costs quickly would be helpful. There's not much room for improvement but that being said, they can improve the overall process of the overall product features and backend. The AWS documentation is written in a way that is not very intuitive. That's an area they can improve. AWS should provide even more support and engagement to accelerate the adoption of new services and features. The use of this tool should be extended to Google and Apple operating systems. | I would like to have a facility for testing possible scenarios by writing dummy data and then doing different queries. The cold start-up of the cloud function needs to speed up. For me personally, I'm not experienced in anything there, however, I've just read online it's a problem. We use Firebase for media processing and we are growing more. As we grow, the pricing goes high and it's high compared to competitors. The solution is expensive. Their technical support needs to be enhanced with more support for customers. There was no way of knowing how the rise in traffic would impact the price. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
I find that Amazon AWS is expensive. It's my understanding that our company is charged a few hundred dollars on a monthly basis. It's pay-as-you-go... but I think the pricing becomes a problem as the IT organization grows. They need to give better pricing when companies grow. | The monthly cost is based on writing data and queries to the database. It is not easy to calculate the cost per copy, use or if the load rose dramatically we did not know how that would impact the final price. |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions are best for your needs. 426,043 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |||
Answers from the Community | |||
| |||
Ranking  | |||
Views 38,437 Comparisons 33,106 Reviews 9 Average Words per Review 332 Avg. Rating 9.1 | Views 13,422 Comparisons 11,256 Reviews 5 Average Words per Review 433 Avg. Rating 8.4 | ||
Popular Comparisons | |||
 Compared 20% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time.  Compared 10% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 7% of the time. |  Compared 50% of the time.  Compared 3% of the time. Compared 3% of the time.  Compared 2% of the time.  Compared 1% of the time. | ||
Also Known As | |||
| EC2, Amazon Web Services, AWS | |||
Learn | |||
| Amazon | Google | ||
Overview | |||
Amazon Web Services (AWS), is a collection of cloud computing services, also called web services, that make up a cloud-computing platform offered by Amazon.com. These services operate from 12 geographical regions across the world. The most central and well-known of these services arguably include Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud, also known as "EC2", and Amazon Simple Storage Service, also known as "S3". Amazon markets AWS as a service to provide large computing capacity more quickly and more cheaply than a client company building an actual physical server farm. | Information Not Available | ||
Offer | |||
Learn more about Amazon AWS | Learn more about Google Firebase | ||
Sample Customers | |||
| Pinterest, General Electric, Pfizer, Netflix, and Nasdaq. | Fabulous, Pic Collage, Shazam, SkyScanner | ||
Top Industries | |||
Software R&D Company29% Comms Service Provider12% Manufacturing Company12% Energy/Utilities Company6% Software R&D Company40% Media Company11% Comms Service Provider10% K 12 Educational Company Or School6% | Software R&D Company32% Comms Service Provider17% Media Company14% K 12 Educational Company Or School8% | ||
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon AWS vs. Google Firebase and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
426,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) 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.