Google Cloud Reviews

I am in the process of migrating from on-premises to the cloud.

We use it for IT infrastructure deployment and management.

The best part of Google Cloud is that it is cheaper than the competitors.

It is easy to set up, monitor, and manage.

You can just connect and start using it through a browser within a few minutes.

Monitoring and usage reporting could be improved. For example, they don't provide the CPU primary memory usage report. They do provide a CPU usage report, but not the memory. This is something that is critical for people interested in monitoring because if you are burdening the machine then you want the option of providing more RAM.

There is no graph or monitoring in the console; if it is there then I haven't found it, so it is something that takes extra time to figure out.

Google does not provide free support and at the least, email support should be available. I am not asking for free chat or telephone support, but given that we are paying to use the machine, email support should be included.

The alerts are somewhat cryptic and do not say much about what is going on.

I have been using Google Cloud for almost three years.

The stability is good.

Google Cloud is a scalable product.

The support is bad, and you have to purchase it separately. There is no free support available.

I am currently working with both Google Cloud and AWS. I am in the process of also trying to implement IBM Cloud.

It is easy to set up and up the time for provisioning depends on the type of machine that you want to set up. It will not take longer than 15 or 20 minutes if you know how to do it.

We have two or three people in the organization who set up the machines.

The support costs extra, even when it comes to email.

This is a good product, but I wouldn't immediately recommend it because there are a lot of options available. People have to choose based on their requirements and location. There is not much different, so people have to look at particular requirements, cost, and support.

I agree that cost is a factor but support should also be considered because it is needed from time to time, and Google does not provide free support. Given that we are paying for the machine, we should have to pay for costly support in addition to that.

This is a good product but I would like better monitoring, alerting, and reporting.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are using GoogleCloud for hosting a SaaS platform.  

The most valuable feature of the product is that it has a very powerful command line.  

It is difficult to say what should be improved because, obviously, they have made some major improvements in the organization of how you do things — such as the way you set up a server. Google has made a lot of effort to try and catch up to the competition in the area of ease-of-use because that would have been my one complaint: that you have got to be quite technical to understand some of the ways that things are done. Azure and Heroku are number one in ease-of-use and they make it very easy. Google has done a lot of work to alleviate that objection and to catch up with Heroku and Azure. But the people that have the most to say about the ease-of-use would be the guys using it. For the developers we have, they like the power and the control that Google gives them.  

So I can not actually answer what exactly has to improve for developers to be more satisfied at this point because they seem quite satisfied with it already. I do not get any complaints from the guys. They are the ones using it every day and I do not use it on a daily basis so I really can not comment in that sense.  

I could say that it can be easier to use for people that do not have the same level of technical skills, but even that has improved a lot with their upgrade to the user documentation.  

I have experience with Google Cloud for about two years now.  

It is extremely stable. I have no negative feedback and no complaints.  

Google Cloud is very scalable. The use of Docker and Kubernetes has really made it extremely scalable. Google's implementation of Kubernetes is excellent.  

At this stage mainly we have developers and dev-ops using the product and it is a team of about 25 guys. We could expand that at any time.  

The initial setup is somewhat more complicated than competing products. I was not directly involved in that capacity so I can not provide details. But also complexity sometimes leads to opportunity as far as customizing performance. The people who are working with the product directly like the ability to fine-tune more than they want simplicity.  

Initially, I was just doing research. I was keeping an open mind and looking at all of the possibilities. I do not think it is quite right to call it "evaluate" when you just do a feasibility study. We did take a closer look at a few solutions like Azure, Heroku, and Google Cloud. We dabbled a little bit with some of them. We eliminated Azure because we were concerned about the support for Mongo DB which is part of our technology stack. Obviously Azure has changed a lot since.  

We trimmed that group to Heroku and Google Cloud which are technically both platforms of high-quality. Heroku is easier to deal with. Using Google Cloud, you have to build a bit of experience with the product because it is not easy if you do not understand how to do things. Heroku makes it a lot easier for you.  

The reason we went with Google Cloud had to do with two things. Number one was cost, and number two is that Google supported everything we use. We had to control the costs initially, so Heroku was pretty much out the door almost immediately. It was a competitive product but it was too expensive. An end-user would not know where a platform is hosted, and they would not care. For an end-user, they go on your website or on your SaaS platform and there is no difference in the experience whether you are hosted with Google or Heroku or AWS. It makes no sense for them to worry about that. But the cost ends up being an important component of the decision for the service company.  

I think the point is that it is very difficult for companies these days to decide between Heroku, Azure and Google Cloud. They all have data centers in the right places in the UK. There is very little that differentiates any of them. Heroku obviously stands out because they are a very stable platform and they do all the hard work for you. If you do not have the expertise to go with a less expensive more labor-intensive solution, then you would go with Heroku and pay more.  

We have a development center in Manila with very experienced guys and they love Google Cloud. It gives them everything they need and everything that is required for a big, fast platform — like the ability to use clustering. I think all of the solutions support Java and ATC (Advanced Analytics Technology). But we have not had any issues since we started on Google Cloud, so we are happy with the direction we have taken.  

The lesson I learned from adopting Google Cloud is that you should do more training before you commit to it.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Google Cloud as an eight-out-of-ten. You can not have a perfect platform. There is always room for improvement and something to add.  

That rating is really because of the feedback I get from the team. I get good feedback from the guys. But it is not really fair of me to give any product a ten if I am not more intimate with it in daily use. I could just as well give it a one if I were totally ignorant of the product, but that would not mean anything.  

We use Google Cloud to deploy our servers on containerized token servers and store user databases, which mostly consist of 5S data. It is very useful for authentication, as most of our back-end operations are powered by Google.

The most valuable feature is the ease of use. Google Cloud has mastered the user interface and user experience so much that it is very convenient. The 5S is the best tool for startups to set up things quickly and powerfully. Apart from that, Google Cloud has a lot of features. We can deploy with really powerful servers, auto-scaling, and all. Yeah. That's it. I tried AWS, but it has too many features. So Google Cloud is simple to use to start with.

When the companies grow at a larger scale, I often see them shifting to a different cloud services provider, like Oracle or AWS, because they may have critical features or preferences over Google Cloud. While Google Cloud is expanding, there is still room for improvement in flexibility.

I have been using Google Cloud for more than a year now.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

It is very scalable. For starters, it is very scalable, but when we use it for a month, we may have to look for a different setup on Google Cloud. But, yes, it is very scalable.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We are happy with the scalability.

The customer service is pretty supportive. We are also in the Google Startup Program and they have been very helpful. The support is amazing.

Positive

The initial setup is super easy. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

Google Cloud has amazing documentation. It took a few hours to deploy the solution.

Some options might be cheaper for much larger scales, but at the scale, we are operating on, Google has very convenient pricing. I'd rate it a three out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

I highly recommend using this solution. It's very easy to set up and get started with and is a perfect tool for startups. They have amazing support with their programs as well.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is the installation of files for tracking and storage purposes.

The availability of content on the solution is very valuable.

The product could be improved by expanding the initial storage space available.

We have been using this solution for approximately five years.

The solution is stable. About 5000 people are using this solution in our company.

We have had a great experience with customer service and support. They provide excellent service.

Positive

We used Microsoft Cloud previously, but Microsoft Cloud automatically closes the operating system and only gives a certain amount of space. Additionally, we use Office, so we don't have Office 365. We automatically have cloud space on Microsoft.

Deployment is very straightforward. 

We worked with vendors for deployment, which took approximately ten minutes.

The licensing costs could be made more affordable for individuals because we need more client-based customers.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten. The solution is very good, but it can be improved by increasing the initial storage space.

Many companies initially consider top providers like AWS and Microsoft Azure, but most choose Google Cloud because of its offered solutions, pricing and local support.

Google Cloud has reduced our operational costs and increased efficiency. For example, deploying production applications traditionally took about a month, but with Google Cloud, it now takes only a day or two. This also extends to monitoring, allowing us to identify and address issues faster than on-premises solutions.

CloudArmor accuracy should be improved. Rules and signatures need to be more refined to detect and process attacks, accuracy of rate-limiting should be improved.

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.

The solution can be scaled horizontally and vertically. I rate it a nine out of ten for scalability. 

I rate the solution's deployment ease an eight out of ten. 

Compared to the other considering the setup and pricing, I rate it at eight out of ten.

We used Google Cloud for to host our automation platform.

Google Cloud performs well. 

I would like to see more code generation features that enable you to take user input in simple English and automatically convert it to code. 

I have been using Google Cloud for four years.

I rate Google Cloud eight out of 10 for stability.

I rate Google Cloud eight out of 10 for scalability. 

The IT team centrally manages the deployment and gives us access to the instance that hosts the automated platform.

I rate Google Cloud seven out of 10. It increases the efficiency of any user to have a solid technology platform. You get the advantage of auto-scaling and upgrades to the latest technology. 

We use Google Cloud mainly for development purposes.

What I like most about Google Cloud is its stability.

I also like that its GUI works fine for my company.

Lower pricing would make Google Cloud better.

We've been using Google Cloud for three to four years.

I found Google Cloud stable. In terms of stability, it's a nine out of ten.

Google Cloud is scalable, and I'm giving it a rating of eight out of ten in terms of scalability.

We have yet to contact Google Cloud technical support because we have not encountered issues with the solution.

We also work with Amazon, apart from Google Cloud. The two solutions are the same, more or less. It's only the usage that's different. We usually recommend both to clients, and whichever clients prefer, we go with that solution.

Google Cloud has a simple setup.

Pricing for Google Cloud could be improved. It would be better if it were lower.

My company uses Google Cloud.

My company has around ten Google Cloud users.

I'm rating Google Cloud as eight out of ten. I deducted two points as the price could be lower.

Google Cloud is a solution my company usually recommends to clients.

I'm a Google Cloud user, and the company I work for has no partnership with Google.

This solution is used for storing my data. It's for my family's personal I work as an information security officer.

I like that it's there anytime you need it. There is some security there and you can put 2FA on the folders and share with others if need be.

From my point of view, the security features could be improved. 

I've been using this solution for many years. 

I have a monthly subscription for Google storage.