Google App Engine Reviews

I use the solution in my company to deploy web applications.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it can be easily deployed and run on our company's server.

The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Google App Engine for two years. I don't remember the version of the solution.

It is a stable solution. My company has not faced any issues with the stability of the product.

My company, which manages a small business, uses Google App Engine internally. There are around 20 to 30 users of the tool.

Whether there are plans to increase the product's usage is something that depends on the customers for whom we developed applications using Google App Engine.

I have had a great experience after contacting the product's technical support team since they could quickly resolve my issues.

My company has extensive experience with AWS.

The product's setup and deployment phases are easy.

Despite the fact that I did not know much about the product's setup process, the whole deployment took me around 15 to 20 minutes. Though there are other companies in the market offering different solutions, many companies prefer to use Google. Google App Engine can be considered a great option for any company. Once the setup of CI/CD pipelines is completed, we don't have to worry about the deployment of the product in our company since code commit can help us go for automatic deployment.

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.

We use the solution for migrating from on-premises to the cloud or for some collocations of software to Google Cloud. We work with App Engine and other serverless solutions like Cloud Run and Google Kubernetes Engine. Additionally, we have some clients working with App Engine.

The solution is serverless, so we don't have to operate it. The requests can go from zero to thousands in a second. The product works with most of the runtimes. I can put my app there, and things go through without much effort.

It is a platform as a service model. The best thing about the solution is that we do not have to operate it. These features are suitable for those who know and like cloud-native solutions.

Some features of runtime don't work well in App Engine. Sometimes we must tune it ourselves or ask Google’s team to improve it. It is the most important thing. Our clients always complain about it.

We are a Premier Partner of the product.

I rate the tool’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight out of ten.

We are resellers. We get issues fixed easily with the help of support. It's not so easy sometimes because Google is so big. Sometimes they don't give us the right attention we need. We are in a hurry, but for them, we are just another customer. That's exactly my business. That is why I am selling the product. For Google, the customer is just another customer, but for me, they are very special.

Neutral

The product is simple to set up. We have to set up some config files. We can then use the product for out scaling, load balancing, and integrating with databases. Google has a platform as a service to integrate with databases like Cloud SQL, PostgreSQL, MySQL, or SQL Server from Microsoft. These are available as a platform as a service in Google Cloud. They are integrated natively with App Engine. These tools are very good and enable things to come through very fast.

The effort required for deployment depends on the complexity. The app server is not complex to set up. Sometimes migrating the database is more complex than migrating the app server to App Engine. Effort is not required for deploying the application itself, but it is required for the things that are integrated with it.

We can put your own runtime. It might function perfectly. It's the same as putting it in a VM. If we use the flexible module of App Engine, we can work with containers. A container is an operating system like Linux. We put our things in it. We have a library and runtime for things to come through smoothly. Most of the time, the problem is not the application itself but the things that go with it.

The number of people required to deploy the solution depends on the complexity. One person can do most of the things in a simple setup. If it is a complex setup, we get a senior DevOps person to do it. Google maintains the product.

It is a very good solution, but there are some problems. If we do the right thing, we will have a very good return on investment. However, we will pay more if we don't know how. We have to be careful. It's not for new buyers. The return on investment will be very low if we do not know how to use it.

If we don't know how to work with the tool, we might have some spikes in price. It will increase a lot of our bill. I rate the pricing a six out of ten.

I work as a presales cloud architect. I am a generalist. I am not a specialist. I know the product, its features, and how to integrate it with other products from Google. People considering the solution must be careful because if they don't tune it, they will pay a lot of money. It's not for new buyers. We have to know what exactly we're doing. People should try to buy the product with the help of a specialist. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

A lot of services we offer are developed and hosted on App Engine,.

As a serverless platform, it saves the effort needed in provisioning and administering backend servers.

App Engine scales really well and It's very clear to know where you're at with App Engine, whether it's the total amount of memory you're using or the number of instances being used by your application. 
Additionally, Administering App Engine from a user's perspective is simple with their very intuitive dashboards.

The documentation is an area that could definitely be improved. Another area of improvement would be the community which is poor and Google could do a lot better on that front. 

I know that my team members who have been working with the solution for just a year or two find the architecture to be quite difficult. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is stable, we've only had two disruptions in our three years of using this product. 

We use a third party support partner of Google for our support. We're very happy with the service they provide and they have always managed to resolve our issues. 

I think the major difference between Google App Engine and every other similar product is its management. It's easier to manage App Engine than many of the other platforms that I've used. Google did a good job in terms of building a user interface so you can easily explain it to a non-technical person. It's just that the use case is very, very limited. Apart from web apps, you can't run other specialized applications on App Engine. 

If you're building a multi-threaded application on App Engine it's very tricky. For multi-threaded applications, I would go for something much more robust like Cloud Run or Cloud GKE, not App Engine.

The initial setup was straightforward for me because I understand the App Engine architecture. I've heard from other developers that they find it very difficult to set up App Engine. For web applications, setup is very very easy and straightforward; for non-web or other special applications, setting up App Engine is challenging. 

We use the paid version under the standard environment and it's relatively expensive compared to other services.

App Engine was built to handle a particular use case which is web applications and that's what it's good at. For applications running in containers or requiring Linux dependencies or applications requiring multiple processes, App Engine is not really your go-to product. You would choose a different solution for that.

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

We use this solution for communication, collaboration, and documentation. We're using Google Business Starter. The solution is deployed on a public cloud.

There are about seven people using this solution in my company.

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. If I share my Google Sheets, as I'm updating, other people can see the updates happening at the same time.

The main thing that could be improved is the pricing. It could be cheaper, especially for those in Africa where we have a high exchange rate.

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.

I have been using this solution for about seven years.

It's stable.

The solution is scalable.

Initial setup was straightforward. On a scale of 1 to 5, I would give it a 4.

We pay the license yearly. It's about $6 a month, which is $72 a year per person, so it's about $500. 

I would give the pricing a 2 on a scale of 1 to 5. The pricing is really not bad. The kill is that my country's economy is causing problems. So with each passing day, our currency loses value, and it sort of looks more expensive each day.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

It is a good product. For someone looking to implement this product, I would advise them to go with it. It's better for people in a stable economy where their pricing is constant and they can predict what it will cost throughout the year.

The type of platform my company generally uses for a project that needs no maintenance of any infrastructure for our customers and needs only Lambda functions is Google App Engine.

The most valuable features of the solution are reliability and the depth of Google App Engine's services, which are some of the reasons why I would like to give it a high rating when compared to AWS.

The support for the Indian region is not as good as compared to the support that is offered to the regions in Europe. My company faces a lot of problems with the support team, especially when Google's technical team is not able to help us immediately when we are stuck with something related to the tool. The support of the product is an area where improvements are required.

Google App Engine is a good product, and its support needs to be improved as it is a new technology that few people know about. There is a need to spread some awareness about the product while also ensuring that some online forums related to the product need to be updated with a lot of documentation related to the tool.

I have been using Google App Engine for six years. My company has a partnership with Google.

I have not had any issues with the stability of the product.

The scalability of the product is fine.

Around 1,500 customers of my company use the product.

I rate the solution's technical support in India a five out of ten.

Neutral

In comparison to other solutions offering similar functionalities, I can say that I have not found any issues with Google App Engine. Google App Engine is at par with the best solutions in the market.

The product's initial setup phase was straightforward, considering that there is good documentation explaining the implementation part of it.

Initially, our company invested time in understanding the entire product. My company went ahead with the PoC phase based on the briefing we received from Google's team, after which we went ahead with the production part.

The solution can be deployed in fifteen days, though Google had claimed that the process might take a month.

A lot of people, including developers and Google administrators, were involved in the product's development process.

The use case where the product has significantly improved the development was attached to one of the scenarios where one of our company's customers wanted a tool to deal with continuous integration and deployments in the infrastructure. In the aforementioned scenario, my company used Google App Engine to deploy an infrastructure for our customer, and the product helped solve a lot of problems, reducing the time required to complete the project by half.

Google App Engine has supported the need for scalable applications for our company's customers since whenever the tool was used, it used to get integrated with a lot of new technologies, like Chef, Puppet, and with some of the APIs, after which my company was able to deploy the product on an on-premises model for our customer.

The feature of Google App Engine that I found to be the most essential for workflows is the high availability and scalability.

The serverless aspect of Google App Engine has benefited our company's customers since it has reduced the time required for the implementation of their applications. The tool also has been able to solve conflicts between developers and the people in operations. The tool offers the convenience of time and ease of implementation, which has improved and solved a lot of problems. The bug-fixing process in the tool is very fast compared to the manual thing.

The product does not require any maintenance.

The advantages of the product revolve around the fact that it offers a lot of depth, ease of management, scalability, and is fast. Developing and hosting applications is possible with Google App Engine. Google App Engine is more beneficial for those who deal in e-commerce.

I guess Google App Engine is a very good tool for infrastructures or when you need some machines that work twenty-four hours, seven days a week. Google App Engine is like a FaaS tool for its users, so users don't need to maintain any infrastructure, thereby drastically reducing their costs. Google App Engine is a very user-friendly, accessible, highly scalable product that allows users to opt for a pay-as-you-go model.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

We have an industrial maintenance program application, and we log maintenance data.

We are using its latest version. When there is a new upgrade, we just upgrade. In terms of deployment, the development suite is on laptops, but the service is on the cloud.

It is simple to use. It is much simpler than AWS. It is also very powerful. 

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 have been using it for two and a half years.

It is stable. There are no issues.

It is scalable.

We haven't used their support, but the documentation is very good. We also use their Stack Overflow service, which is quite okay.

Its initial setup is very complex.

I'm quite happy with it. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

This solution is a model for us right now, and I'm using it with my classmates. We are resellers. I'm currently a Masters student and teaching assistant. 

The most valuable feature in the solution is basically the security where you're required to use the AIP to initialize the accessibility process. It means that unauthorized individuals are unable to access certain applications. Mostly it is based on the workplace environment. Testing deployments is also a valuable feature as it enables you to test your app before you deploy on cloud.

Everything so far has gone smoothly, I've never had a struggle with the solution. 

In terms of product improvement, when it comes to billing, I think they should include something that would give the client or user an indication of what's happening so they can be aware of how pricing is being managed. 

I've been using this solution for the past few months. 

It's a stable solution. 

I think it's a scalable solution. because basically you can add the amount of storage you want. When it comes to bugs, mostly there are no errors. It has happened, but rarely although I do think a little bit of improvement could be made in that area. 

Initial installation is very straightforward, it takes no more than 45 minutes. 

This solution is cheaper and more efficient compared to other similar solutions with cloud vendors. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for business purposes for our clients. We develop software.

The solution allows you to create apps right on Google.

It would be helpful if they could improve the user interface. It could use some modifications.

There needs to be more directions in terms of how to use the solution.

The solution is mostly stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is okay. It's not too complex. Deployment took about one day.

We handled the deployment ourselves. There were four of us, including a back-end developer, a front-end developer, and an HR manager.

The pricing is okay. It's not too expensive.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.