Google Cloud Reviews

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.

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.

The value for us is the infrastructure as we don't have to host or worry about upgrades. It eliminates capital expenditures and subsequent MNO that we would use to spend on on-prem architectures. That money is funneled towards security and connectivity provisioning. This is a better way of spending money and trying to keep up with the cloud-forward strategy that we have in Oregon.

An area of improvement would be in the of managing accounts in terms of what we are using for memory, availability, and monitoring. We want to monitor our SaaS deployment within Google to give our SOC a good idea of what's going on.

We have been using this solution for a couple of years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

This solution is worth the money we are paying. I would rate the pricing a three out of five. 

From a maintenance perspective, we have cloud architects who are working on what data can go where and what infrastructure we require from the cloud service providers. This is a team of ten. 

I would advise others considering this solution to always plan and have a good blocking service before moving anything to the cloud. It is important to complete an evaluation of sing the solution long term and to take cost provisioning, availability of services, cyber security, credibility and compliance into consideration.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for deploying to the cloud. We have two products in production. 

Two years ago, I was working on local servers only. With this, we were able to move to the cloud.

There's a lot of investment in Google Cloud. It's a very good product now. 

The solution is stable.

It's more widely recognized and used by more people. 

They continue to invest in the cloud and it's becoming very good.

The security is getting better. 

It's easy to work with. 

We're very happy with the implementation at this time. 

The product can scale well.

I cannot recall coming across any missing features.

I've used the solution for a while now. It's been at least two years. 

The solution has been stable and reliable. I haven't dealt with bugs or glitches and have noticed any crashing or freezing. 

The solution is capable of scaling. It's not a problem. 

We have five people using it right now. 

In the future, we will increase usage.

Technical support has been helpful and responsive. We find them to be very good. 

I also have experience with Amazon as well. 

The solution has been easy to work with and easy to implement. It's not overly complex.

We have one person that is in charge of maintenance. It doesn't require much oversight. 

We have witnessed an ROI, although I do not have specifics surrounding that aspect. 

We've had licensing with Google for four years. The pricing is fine. It's not overly expensive. 

At this point, I haven't evaluated any other options. 

I am using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

In general, the solution is great and I would rate it ten out of ten. 

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 this solution for email and also make use of the Google servers and related services. 

The storage available for this solution could be improved, especially compared to a solution like Microsoft which offers 1 TB of storage. Google cloud offers only 30 GB.

I have used this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The customer service team for this solution is very knowledgeable. 

There is very little setup needed for this solution. 

This solution is reasonably priced. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

We use Google Cloud for setting up the server. It is our development Server.

It is simple to use. 

Everything was very simple to set up. I would say that we were already fairly comfortable with Google. 

It didn't take long to get everything set up and understand what was going on. Things are pretty clear.

The price could improve. Every customer would agree, that they would like the price to be reduced.

We have been working with Google Cloud for one year.

I am satisfied with the stability of Google Cloud.

The scalability of Google Cloud is good. It's a scalable product.

We only have one instance, which is a single server.

We didn't require any technical support. We were able to find solutions on the internet.

The security features in OpenText are great. 

For web security, we do not use anything specific. Because we are working on OpenText AppWorks, the built-in security features are useful. In the production environment, the customer is responsible for the security of the web servers.

We use both Windows Server 2019 and Linux Servers.

Our customers have tested Webroot endpoint protection, and have not had any issues.

We are also working with Amazon AWS EC2. Our feedback would be similar to Google Cloud.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I don't remember the exact time because it was a while ago, but from what I recall, the setup took no more than two or three hours.

Technical assistance is required, but it is easily accessible via the internet. It is not difficult to understand.

In my opinion, the price is not excessive when compared to competitors. The market determines the price.

Licensing fees are paid monthly.

We have not yet evaluated Pega BPM, but we plan to do so in the future. We may begin practicing in Pega.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Google Cloud a nine out of ten.