Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Google App Engine vs Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Google App Engine
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Google App Engine is 2.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

OmkarPatil - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplifies app development process for businesses
The product simplifies app development processes since once the local development is completed, my company has a common configuration in place where we can specify the requirements to run an application, after which we need to do a one-click GCP deployment for the entire application. In general, the two offer managed deployment options, so we don't have to worry about deployment. In my company, we just configure the servers and check if anything needs to be containerized, after which GCP handles everything for us. A project where Google App Engine scalability was essential was when, recently, my company was involved with Golang to build a web application, after which deploying that application on Google App Engine was really easy. In my company, we also had a Django application in Python, and it was easy to deploy. As my company deals with small-scale projects, the automated scaling feature of Google App Engine is not something we thought about. I wouldn't recommend the product to others unless the potential end users use GCP and have a word with their vendors about their plans. One specific recommendation from me would be that the product's potential uses should stick with a particular vendor. If someone wants a product that is easy to deploy and scalable, then multiple options are available in the market. The product integrates very well with other Google solutions. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.
Adrian Bilauca - PeerSpot reviewer
Handles security setups independently for a more secure environment
OpenShift does have more secure features. Azure also has equivalent services. For my client, it was good enough to switch to Azure. For development, there wasn't any significant change in effort, however, for the DevOps team, it was a relief since Azure has managed services. We used elasticity and scalability all over.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day."
"Its ability to integrate with most devices helps users who have different or old devices."
"The WhatApp feature is the most valuable."
"The seamless integration of Google App Engine with other Google Cloud services has enhanced my application capabilities by allowing us to trigger Cloud Jobs from App Engine and some cloud functions, as handling messages through Pub/Sub."
"What I find most beneficial about Google App Engine is that we do not need to manage it since it's a fully managed serverless platform, allowing us to spend more time on development rather than managing and maintaining configurations."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, considering that there is good documentation explaining the implementation part of it."
"Google App Engine is highly scalable and can integrate easily with other applications."
"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."
"The deployment mechanism has become more dynamic with the use of the product."
"In general, customers appreciate its ability to run different workloads, manage applications through CI/CD pipelines like Jenkins, and leverage tools like Helm charts and Kako."
"I've used the elasticity and scalability all over."
"The initial setup is easy."
"For the DevOps team, it was a relief since Azure has managed services."
"The solution offers the most robust Kubernetes orchestration available."
"The portability, moving from one platform to another, is easy."
"The most valuable feature of Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is the UI console. We are able to receive the resources from the console directly."
 

Cons

"The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe."
"There are two versions of Google App Engine: flexible and standard versions. I think they can improve by having only one version."
"The whitelist and blacklist of APIs can be a deal-breaker due to security concerns, and the deployment process is chaotic."
"The interface and IDE, where I write code, could be improved. Unlike other IDEs like Visual Studio, it lacks easy access to available functions."
"The areas of Google App Engine I would to see improved or enhanced in the future include expanding inbuilt support for more programming languages than the current limited options such as Python, Go, and Node, ideally adding support for languages such as Java."
"The main drawback with Google App Engine's standard environment was its restrictions. We could not work with file systems, run shell scripts from the environment, or use WebSockets."
"Difficult to assess how pricing is managed."
"Google Cloud support for Google App Engine is very poor, with unresponsive and unaware agents. It took them almost a month to inform me that SSH is not possible with private instances."
"Many of the managed services are not accessible."
"The effectiveness is satisfactory, and there haven't been any additional fees due to meeting demands. However, there's room for improvement in pricing, performance, and stability. Regarding the UI, it could be more user-friendly and integrated with various platforms. Currently, the UI lacks user-friendliness, especially for developers unfamiliar with container technology. Expecting them to create YAML files for security purposes is unrealistic without proper guidance or experience. This aspect needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in cluster-based queue monitoring and autoscaling."
"The service mesh integrations could improve the solution."
"The installation and configuration procedure should be simplified."
"There is more work and effort needed for when many of the managed services are not accessible, especially in the security area. You have to do your own security setups as opposed to using a managed firewall."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
"Making it even more cost-effective could be explored."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If we don't know how to work with the tool, we might have some spikes in price."
"I would like to have more free application with it. Some of the applications, I am paying more for them. I think that they must be free."
"We pay the license yearly. It's about $6 a month, which is $72 a year per person, so it's about $500."
"This product is not costly when compared to other vendors."
"The pricing is a little high in China."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user8586 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 14, 2013
Amazon vs Rackspace vs Microsoft vs Google: Cloud Hosting Services Comparison
Amazon Web Services, Rackspace OpenStack, Microsoft Windows Azure and Google are the major cloud hosting and storage service providers. Athough Amazon is top of them and is oldest in cloud market, Rackspace, Microsoft and Google are giving tough competition to each other and to Amazon also for…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
11%
University
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Google App Engine?
The product's setup and deployment phases are easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google App Engine?
Google App Engine's pricing seemed reasonable to my employer. However, I cannot make comparisons as I don't have experience with other managed services.
What needs improvement with Google App Engine?
While integrating Google App Engine with other services, I don't recall any specific challenges. The main drawback with Google App Engine's standard environment was its restrictions. We could not w...
What do you like most about Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
Our pipeline integrates various monitoring tools like Fortify for security checks. Once the pipeline processes the code, the finished product is deployed on Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud. We ensu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
From a cost perspective, some cost-effective situations were more difficult to achieve in Azure than in OpenShift. Comparing them can be difficult since the financial services cloud had stripped ma...
What needs improvement with Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
There is more work and effort needed for when many of the managed services are not accessible, especially in the security area. You have to do your own security setups as opposed to using a managed...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Khan Academy, Best Buy, Gigya, MetOffice, Getaround, Mimiboard, NewsLimited, WebFilings, and CloudLock.
edenor, Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about Google App Engine vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.