We're using this solution to host all of our applications. Currently, we're in the process of migrating all the SAP servers to GCP.
There are about 2,000 people using this solution in our organization.
We're using this solution to host all of our applications. Currently, we're in the process of migrating all the SAP servers to GCP.
There are about 2,000 people using this solution in our organization.
The performance is a valuable feature.
The price of the license could be cheaper.
We have been using this solution for a few months.
It's stable.
The scalability is good.
We pay for a monthly license.
I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.
Google Cloud can be used to share files with no need to carry them with you since it is on the cloud. You can access it anywhere if you are traveling or if you have important documents.
Google Cloud is easy to use and accessible anywhere.
Microsoft's solution is more common, Google Cloud could improve by being more compatible with different platforms or entities.
I have been using Google Cloud for a few years.
The solution is straightforward and since I am a professional, there is no need for any support.
I have used Microsoft's solution and they have more users using it than Google Cloud.
Google Cloud has no installation since it is on the cloud.
Google Cloud should be divided into modules so that users can buy which module will satisfy them. The overall price of Google Cloud should be reduced, Microsoft is a little bit cheaper. However, if Google divided the cloud offering it would be better. For example, if someone wants to use only for OneDrive they should be able to purchase the service separately, it would reduce the price. There is a license required to use this solution for enterprises.
There is a free account, which the users can increase the size of the space. Google cloud is used in most Android Mobile device operating systems.
I have always said that Google Cloud is better than Microsoft, but the common solution is Microsoft and with some of the compatibility issues with Google Cloud, we typically choose Microsoft.
I rate Google Cloud a nine out of ten.
We use Google Suite of products for enterprise and we build our technology products for warehouse management systems, and transportation management systems.
We use Google Cloud for our enterprise. It is used for pretty much everything from emails to storage and to communicate everything.
Google Cloud is very light.
It is easy to use and has a very familiar interface.
I have used Microsoft and I have used Google. I feel equally comfortable with both, but Google is lighter and it's easy to work with on your mobile devices.
Google has a lot of features that are really good. I am happy with the features that Google offers.
As far as internal communications, Microsoft is much better because of the way it is structured. I feel more comfortable with Microsoft.
I feel that the Google product is incomplete with regard to internal communications. It is an area that needs some improvement.
The user experience could be better. Microsoft user experience is better.
The compatibility of different devices could be better because it looks different on different devices, It's not the same.
I have been with the company for seven or eight months and it has been used for a long time before that. They have been using it from the start.
I am satisfied with the stability of Google Cloud.
Google Cloud is very scalable. Many companies use Google Cloud because of its scalability.
We have more than 30,000 users in our organization who are using Google Cloud.
I have not had any issues with the technical support in the eight months I have been using Google Cloud.
The initial setup is easy. It's quite straightforward.
I am not familiar with the pricing, but I would guess that it is probably cheaper than Microsoft Suite. There are a lot of startups that use Google Cloud.
We are a Google house, and we don't use any of the Microsoft products.
Google is fantastic and I think that people should go for it. I would recommend using Google Cloud.
I would rate Google Cloud a seven out of ten.
We primarily use the solution for data. For example, we use it for email and Google Docs and sheets and content of that nature.
I find that Google Cloud is easier to understand than other options.
I like its product offering, which is simpler to figure out and automate.
The setup is straightforward.
It is scalable.
The solution is stable.
Technical support has been good.
I'm still confused by the usefulness of the cloud and I'm not sure why everyone is moving there. I don't trust the act of sending my company's information to whoever knows where instead of having it safe on my own servers.
I find it hard to download items, especially on their operating system.
The Google operating system leaves a lot to be desired.
It does not seem to provide any virtualization whatsoever.
I've used the solution for a while.
The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.
Cloud providers like Google are designed to be scalable. The issue is you are supposed to be bursting at the seams before you scale and that doesn't make much financial sense.
The customer service is very good.
Neutral
I'm also familiar with Azure. I've used Microsoft products for ten years or so, however, I find Google to be simpler.
The initial setup was pretty straightforward and simple.
Pricing is pretty good. However, all cloud products offer pretty close to the same pricing.
I haven't used a lot of cloud products and haven't experimented too much with Google Cloud, beyond playing with Google Workspace.
From what I have experienced, I would rate it seven out of ten.
We primarily use the solution for sharing resources, including creating folders and sending them to the team so that docs can be loaded in.
You can start with 30MB for free. Anybody can get edit access via permissions and people can just start collaborating.
The setup is easy.
The solution is stable and reliable.
It can scale.
The solution is very user-friendly.
We'd like to maybe see more integrations in the future.
It would be nice if they could offer more free storage.
The solution could always improve security.
We've been using the solution for a long time.
It's a stable solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten. The reliability is good, and there are no bugs or glitches.
The scalability is great. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of being able to expand the product.
We have a few hundred users on the solution currently. We might increase usage sometime in the future.
I've never had to reach out to technical support in the past. It's easy to use, and we haven't had any issues.
It's not complex to set up the solution. The implementation is pretty straightforward. The deployment itself did not take very long. everyone pretty much knows how to use it. There's no real learning curve.
I'm not sure how many people in my company need to maintain the product, if any.
I've never looked at the ROI.
I'm not sure what the exact licensing costs are.
I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.
I'd recommend the solution to others as it is very easy to use and is great for collaboration.
I would rate the solution nine out of ten.
We primarily use the solution for small applications. There are also a few web applications with Angular.
I'm very happy with Google Cloud. Everything works. For us, the solution is very easy to use. We have the right skillsets for it.
Users find it easy to work with it.
I don't need to create an API layer since it automatically creates it for me.
It offers a real-time database, so we get updates really fast.
The Firebase database is great.
The tutorials people can find online are good.
The solution offers fair pricing.
It's pretty stable.
The solution can scale well.
It offers a simple initial setup.
There is only one issue that I have and it is when you create an account, they limit the number of accounts you can create.
The documentation could be better.
The backup needs improvement. I would prefer to do a one-piece backup solution where I can schedule backups.
It's just too complicated to migrate from one Firebase database to another. It should have been easy.
I'd like to see something like an exchange server, a managed email server, where I can handle other clients. I'd like something similar to Microsoft Exchange yet something that is like a fully managed email service.
I started using the solution maybe four years ago.
The stability has been great. I'd rate it ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. I've had no issues.
It's a very scalable solution. I'd rate its ability to expand at a ten out of ten.
We took a managed server, so it automatically scales. We've had a case where there were a thousand users streaming videos, and it all works fine.
We have 1200 users for one application. That said, we have a few applications and they all have varying amounts of users. It's likely around 1,000 users per app.
It's in our roadmap to increase usage.
I have tried Google support. I did send emails and never got a response for some of them. Compared to AWS, AWS has the best technical support and Google's is weaker.
Positive
We're also using AWS.
For Angular apps and for real-time apps and for real-time apps, Google Cloud is much better. When it comes to cleaning lambdas and small APIs, AWS is better. And the only thing I would say AWS is better is technical support. The support is 24 hours, and they're always ready to help. Google is less expensive, however.
The solution is straightforward to set up. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. It's a cloud product. It's very easy.
Once you know what to do, the deployment is very quick and really easy. It's like one command line that you do to deploy. It only takes a minute.
We've got a repo. However, the deployments are done manually with just one command. They build locally and deploy manually.
Just one person managed the deployment process.
Everything is implemented in-house. We did not need outside assistance. I was able to handle the deployment myself.
Something that used to take six months might now only take two weeks. That's quite a change and a pretty good ROI.
I'd rate the pricing ten out of ten. It is an affordable product.
The cost might be $10 a month per user, which is about $300 a month in total.
We're a customer.
I'm using a few of the services. I'm using the latest version of the solution.
I'd advise new users to go through some tutorials. The documentation can be a bit hard to read. However, there are a lot of good tutorials out there.
I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.
When looking at CI/CD, and Kubernetes they are very good. In the new areas of CI/CD, and DevOps, those tools are actually good, in terms of utilization.
Current technologies keep on changing, so definitely those new changes need to be incorporated quickly. The competition is always out there to be one step ahead. How those open-source platforms can be easily integrated into the cloud, is going to be the key in the future.
I have been using Googe Cloud now for three to four years.
The stability is good with Google Cloud.
Google cloud is scalable. We have more than two hundred working on the solution.
We are actually using other products also of the cloud like AWS and Azure. Compared to that, it is going very well and most of the customers now actually use Google Cloud. If you talk about security, it is actually the integration with LDAP. When moving the organization's data it is important to manage that same LDAP, authentication, and usage of connecting the Google public cloud to the private infrastructure. Those items are actually much better in Google Cloud.
The initial setup is easy and straightforward.
When you have professional individuals work with the deployment it takes roughly three to four hours for installation.
I would rate Good Cloud a nine out of ten.
We're using Google Cloud as infrastructure for hosting MySQL, but don't use Google's Database as a Service. We manage our database ourselves.
Google Cloud lacks some tools for database migration. I've only used MySQL and AWS in my career, so those are the only ones I can compare. AWS has a database migration tool that you can integrate with a cloud backup, so can take that backup and restore it in the AWS public cloud, but it's not the same with Google Cloud. We have to use a utility called mysqldump, which takes a long time to restore. That's a big shortcoming of Google Cloud. I don't know why they haven't thought of it.
I've been using Google Cloud Platform for about a year.
We weren't affected during the last major Google Cloud outage. We weren't in the availability zone that was affected. We haven't used it like Infrastructure as a Service. It doesn't provide you a lot unless all your services are in that particular cloud.
I've used all three major public cloud platforms that offer infrastructure as a service. It's hard to compare. If you're a bigger enterprise, it's better to use multiple public clouds so that you are not putting all your eggs in one basket.
For example, you might have an outage in Google Cloud but not in Azure or vice versa. It's the same for AWS. I can't say it won't ever happen, but all three major public clouds haven't gone down at the same time.
I haven't had any trouble setting up Google Cloud.
I rate Google Cloud seven out of 10.