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.
"It is simple to use. It is much simpler than AWS. It is also very powerful."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, considering that there is good documentation explaining the implementation part of it."
"Administering App Engine is simple; it has intuitive UIs and a very scalable app engine."
"Seurity features - unauthorized individuals are unable to access certain applications."
"The product's setup and deployment phases are easy."
"The WhatApp feature is the most valuable."
"The solution is serverless, so we don't have to operate it."
"The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day."
"We have not had any issues with the performance, or the stability."
"Microsoft Azure is an optimized solution when we compare it to any other particular cloud solution."
"Microsoft offers free courses and an exam on their products. Many of my colleagues who use Microsoft Azure take advantage of those free courses to help them learn about the solution in depth."
"It's a great solution. It's so customizable. Every user can create dashboards to suit their needs. We can create and share them with our teammates easily, too."
"There are many different components such as SaaS, PaaS, and API so every month they are releasing a few hundred new features."
"The best feature in Microsoft Azure is that I don't have to change computers. I don't have to upgrade or if something breaks or a hard drive crashes. The lack of a physical aspect is the major feature for me."
"The product is a cloud solution."
"The solution has given us more agility, scalability and opportunity to optimize the cost."
"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."
"Some features of runtime don't work well in App Engine."
"The documentation and community are lacking for this product."
"Data consumption of the device could be improved."
"Difficult to assess how pricing is managed."
"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 support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."
"One key area for improvement is the Azure load balancer. Currently, it only supports virtual machines (VMs) running in the same virtual network (vNet) on the backend. They should definitely support machines or IPs running on-premises (prem) or in other Azure VNets. GCP and AWS already support that. So, Azure Load Balancer should support that as well"
"The security must be improved."
"Lacks flexibility in terms of storage or resource allocation."
"They are a bit closed on the customization side. If they open the customization then it will be very good."
"There should be be better support for microservices and containers."
"The biggest area needing improvement involves the licensing cost."
"Microsoft's technical support could be improved."
"The solution's email hosting pricing could be improved."
Google App Engine is ranked 13th in PaaS Clouds with 23 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in PaaS Clouds with 298 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, 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.