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.
"The solution is serverless, so we don't have to operate it."
"Its ability to integrate with most devices helps users who have different or old devices."
"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."
"Seurity features - unauthorized individuals are unable to access certain applications."
"The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, considering that there is good documentation explaining the implementation part of it."
"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."
"Administering App Engine is simple; it has intuitive UIs and a very scalable app engine."
"Its ability to scale is most valuable. There are certain periods of the year when we are busier, and we're able to scale up and scale down with Azure depending upon our needs."
"With the Azure solution, you can get more value from your cloud investment no matter what your future goals are. It depends on your level of familiarity with the cloud you are using or with your computing. Azure helps you with every stage of the cloud."
"The product is rather stable. We haven't had any issues with it in that sense."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure is the Area feature. Additionally, the SQL Server DB as a serverless pool is useful, storage-wide external tables are helpful, and PolyBase is very good at reading external data. The capacity of Synapse to analyze in analytics is very good and it supports a range of data."
"The most efficient feature of Microsoft Azure is that we can use it to update a website with a few clicks."
"The tool's most valuable features are SQL servers and Managed Instance databases."
"I have found the solution to be flexible, easy to use, and the documents are straightforward to understand."
"The solution has high stability."
"Some features of runtime don't work well in App Engine."
"There needs to be more directions in terms of how to use the solution."
"The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."
"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."
"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."
"Difficult to assess how pricing is managed."
"The documentation and community are lacking for this product."
"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 support subscription models need improvement."
"The pricing can be reduced."
"It would be nice to have faster support."
"Use of the solution could be easier."
"We need more customization and support for doing so."
"It can be improved in terms of ease of billing or monitoring of the billing. That gets to be a little difficult."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"The solution must improve its pricing."
Google App Engine is ranked 13th in PaaS Clouds with 5 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 40 reviews. Google App Engine is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Google App Engine writes "The tool offers reliability and ease of management". 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, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Google Compute Engine and OpenShift, whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Pivotal Cloud Foundry and Linode. 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.