Google Cloud Storage Reviews

In my company, we have a multi-cloud environment in which we are using AWS and Google. So, we are using a mix of services, in which some of our work is on AWS, while the others are on Google. Mostly, we are using certain DevOps tools in our company since I am not a part of the team that handles the infrastructure.

In my department, Kubernetes, Docker, and some other DevOps-related stuff, like containers, are what we have been using on Google Cloud Storage. However, there might be some other teams who are using the infrastructure as well.

Although I cannot provide a detailed analysis of the solution's valuable features, I can say that its storage capacity is adequate based on my team's experience. We used to consult with our cloud team to get the storage, mainly related to volumes on the Kubernetes side, and they were able to align those things for us. So, I won't be able to specifically speak about its storage since when it comes to Kubernetes, there is also an open-source version available in the market. The service-based Kubernetes from Google is quite secure and helpful, specifically the GUI of the solution.

In my previous company, we used Google. More precisely, we were involved with it because earlier, I was using Azure, which we were specifically using AKS, which is Azure Kubernetes Service. So, AKS was a solution that was well-managed by both cloud providers. But compared to AKS, Google Kubernetes is better, especially its GUI and user-friendliness, because one doesn't have to search too much to find a solution.

Solutions from Amazon and AWS are quite better compared to Google Cloud Storage since they offer more services than Google. When compared to one of its competitors, Google Cloud Storage does not have or offer a lot of services to its users. So, this is one of the downsides of the solution. This might be because AWS has been there a long while Google has just come up in the last five years.

I have experience with Google Cloud Storage for three to four months. Also, I am using the solution's latest version. My company has a partnership with Google. The solution is a Google-managed service.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Google is quite scalable, especially Google Kubernetes. But again, it depends on why we are using the solution.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten since the services provided by the solution are good. More than a hundred people in my organization are using the solution. From an admin point of view, around ten to fifteen engineers work on the solution. We also have an engineering department with users using it for their applications and other work

The solution's customer service and support are helpful since they are responsive. I rate the solution's technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

If we use a managed service, then Google takes care of the maintenance part. However, if we use an infra one, we manage the maintenance part. I can't say how many people are involved in the maintenance phase because we have multiple applications, and people are involved from the application side and the IT side. So, it depends, and it is situational in nature, like if we are using infrastructure service, then it's all managed by us. Only the VM is managed by the cloud. However, if the application is installed, then the application is managed by the application team. And if any storage or network is associated, then that is all managed by us.

The deployment model for the solution consists of AWS, Amazon, and Google. To some extent, I think we also use Azure for O365 or M365, like Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, and Outlook.

There were no complexities involved in the installation of the solution. In our company, we only had to use the online services provided by Google to install the solution. Though most of the installation can be done online, we are dependent on certain deployment tools like Terraform and Ansible for easy deployment and integration.

Regarding the cost of the solution, Google offers its users a pay-as-you-go model pricing. The cost of the solution is handled by the department handling billing and procurement in the company. So, they used to come to us if they received any extra bills. Then, they used to ask us the reason for extra usage of the services since they always used to compare the solution's current usage with its usage in the past few months.

I previously used Microsoft Azure.

I am not sure if I would recommend the solution to others since I am not involved in the infrastructure side, where they actually use the solution for storage purposes. Since I am a part of the DevOps team, I use it to manage services like Kubernetes and containerization. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I'm helping the company build a data warehouse and expand it to utilize the current platform and build new machine-learning operations. All of the stack is currently stuck with the Google stack. I use BigQuery and their Data Studio to use as a data warehouse. I'm looking for another platform to build a machine-learning operation on. ProtectAI is good, however, it's quite new.

It's user-friendly. We find it to be very easy to use.

They also have the SDK for the development team to integrate with their application, their system, which has been useful.

The product is quite stable. 

Google is targeting customers right now in the Vietnam market, and therefore, they have lots of promotions. They also have a lot of teams in Vietnam, so they give a lot of support and troubleshooting. 

The product can scale. 

The security is pretty good.

Comparing to Azure Machine Learning, Microsoft Azure is much better and they have more experience than Google. The problem I face right now is that my data warehouse is being hosted on Google Cloud, however, integration between Google Cloud to Microsoft Azure is a big problem.

I would love to use Amazon S3 as it's more user-friendly and the SDK is better. It's easy to let the developer implement it, whereas Google Cloud Storage is hard for the developer to use. The SDK is quite complicated.

The security could always be better.

I have used the solution since I joined my current company. That was one and a half years ago. I have a little less than two years of experience. 

The stability of the solution is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution can scale. If a company needs to expand it, it can. Compared to other options, it's quite good.

The service and system technology team serves around 2,000 people.

Technical support has been great so far. Google has a lot of teams in the country that have been really helpful and responsive. They give us a lot of attention when we need to troubleshoot. 

I've worked with Amazon and Azure in the past as well. 

Since Google has recently targeted Vietnam, they've been offering many customers in the country lots of great promotions and incentives. 

It's about nearly $10,000 USD to use the services on GCP, however, Google gave us a good deal which is why we originally went with them.

We do pay a monthly fee to Google. We use a lot of their services. 

As a cloud solution, we're always on the latest and most up-to-date version of the product. Google keeps it updated for us and we do not have to update anything manually.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been pretty satisfied with the solution overall. 

While AWS S3 is the best, and Microsoft is pretty good, I'd still recommend Google.

I primarily use the solution for storing documents. 

It's my understanding that the solution is secure.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is very good.

There is a free-to-use version. This is the version I use.

While the solution seems to be secure, I worry that, with the cloud, there is a chance of hacking. It would be ideal if they could be more transparent about the processes they go through to keep our data secure in the cloud and on their systems. 

I'd also like it to be more clear in terms of who is accessing the files and when. I'd like to know if and when someone downloads something or if a file has been manipulated, and who has accessed or changed it, in order to protect our company's most sensitive information.

In my domain, you receive a lot of mail and a lot of publicity marketing and you need to trash them. I don't. One month ago, they told me that I have the maximum allowed storage and I would have to make space in my database. I don't have time to do that. Now, I check my email every day and I trash all things not necessary, and I'm not putting photos in it. I don't know why my database is already full. If you don't keep on top of deleting items and wait until it's almost full, it's so hard to go back and delete so much content.

I first started using the solution a few years ago. It's been a while. I would estimate it's been about six years or so at this point. 

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good.

The product can scale up if you need it to.

I've never had to reach out to Google's technical support. I haven't had any issues with it. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be if you contacted them.

There's no installation process as the solution is cloud-based. You don't need to upload or install anything.

The version I use is open-source. It doesn't cost anything to use. 

I simply use this solution for my own personal purposes. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to other users.

I primarily use Google Cloud Storage to store most of my large videos and images. It's very easy to filter it out and get something whenever it's required, rather than keeping it in the traditional way of storage. I use it for personal purposes. 

This solution is cloud-based, so it's always on the latest version. 

The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is the filter option. You can search with some artificial intelligence kinds of features. For example, if I search for a beach, it'll show me all the beach-related pictures, which I took five or ten years before. So this is a cool feature that I've seen. They give as many features as they can to make it better, so I'm happy with this solution. 

Google Cloud Storage could be improved if they provided more free storage for free accounts. 

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for more than five years. 

This solution is stable. So far, I've never faced any kinds of outages or unavailability. So far, so good. 

This solution provides scalability. If you're ready to pay, they're ready to give you as much storage as you want, so it's okay. 

I'm continuously using Google Cloud Storage. I add a few photos or videos day by day, but there aren't many specific cases where I have to increase my usage.

Before using Google Cloud Storage, I used the traditional method of storing things on a hard disk. 

The installation process is straightforward and perfect. It doesn't require any technical knowledge, and you can do it yourself. It took me less than five to ten minutes. 

I implemented this solution myself. 

If you're ready to pay, they're ready to give you as much storage as you want. Considering the features that Google Cloud Storage provides, the pricing is reasonable. So far, I'm still using the free service from them because I'm able to meet my requirements with the free subscription. Maybe, in the future, if a storage requirement comes, I'll pay for it or go for the license. 

I rate Google Cloud Storage a nine out of ten. In terms of security, scalability, availability, and free storage, I always recommend that people go for Google Cloud. 

You would end up using Google Cloud storage for anything that has got to do with Google, for example, your Gmail, Google photos, your Google Drive and so on. It’s for storage.

I like the simplicity. It is seamlessly integrated with your Android. There’s no fuss, no hassle.

The solution is stable.

You can continue to add to your storage. You just have to pay and it will grow in size. It is also free up until 15GB.

It's used by a lot of people.

The solution only allows so much space for free. Later, they forced me to buy additional storage. Now I'm a paying Google customer. 

I'm not a fan of Gmail or the overall email viewing experience. I don’t like the interface. I prefer Microsoft and Outlook.

I'd like to see them improve on that product. They should declutter the UI and keep it simple so that, for example, the latest conversation comes at the top of Gmail and you don't need to really break your head to figure out where things are. 

My concern is that they could block me at any time for any reason. It’s not about security. It’s more about me being unsure how they can assure me of having access when I need my files. At some point, Google can just say “you’ve exhausted your storage” and you have to buy more to access to keep your files.

I've been using the solution for barely three months. 

I haven’t had any issues with stability. There’s been nothing so far that I can think about in terms of issues. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s reliable.

It’s my understanding that almost everybody uses the product. Very few are still in the paying segment as they still may not have exhausted their quotas. Unless you are an avid Apple fan, you'll end up using Google Cloud. After all, who doesn't have a Gmail account?

I don't recall any time in the recent past having contacted for support for a technical glitch.

As a cloud-based solution, there isn't really any setup process to go through. 

The solution is free at first, and then you have to pay. I've exhausted my quota of 15 GB which generally Google gives to every user.

I’d recommend the solution to other users.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

The company that I am with currently is doing consulting, and my previous company used it in the cloud. Both will be in the Google Cloud.

I personally used Google Cloud Storage to upload data, and the company is using it to save data model training results, such as AI training results.

Its integration with BigQuery has helped in the organization's improvement.

Its blob storage, being able to handle large amounts of unstructured data, is very useful. 

Google Cloud Storage is highly reliable.

On the surface, it appears to be a straightforward product.

It's everything you want, and not complex. 

There was one complicated use case at a previous firm, two years ago. If you didn't name it, but sequentially named it, and you saved your files over a day, and it's a sequence, there would be some inefficiency with the cachets. If you are trying to retrieve large blocks of files, there was a problem with the cache, it was inefficient.

There are inefficiencies with cache when the names are sequencing.

Creating a hierarchy can be a little difficult, and obtuse to deal with, but it is something that is workable for a good engineer.

There is no learning curve as compared to other solutions.

 I would like to see some assistance in establishing a hierarchy.

I have been working with Google Cloud Storage for seven years.

The versions are upgraded, but there are not many changes.

In the past, we have used S3, and Amazon AWS.

Google Cloud Storage is an extremely reliable product. There are no issues with the stability of Google Cloud Storage.

Google Cloud Storage is a scalable solution.

The Google technical support is not very good at all. But it's such a simple product that in my entire career, we have never had to contact support.

I have several solutions such as BigQuery, Cloud Storage, Cloud Functions, Data Studio as well as Looker.

I have been working with Google Data Studio for three or four years.

The initial setup was fine.

It's an inexpensive product.

Solid, cheap, and performant are the three words that come to mind when describing this solution.

I would rate Google Cloud Storage a nine out of ten.

Google Cloud Storage is primarily used for backing up my devices, to sync my photos and videos.

The performance is good.

I haven't had any issues with the security of Google Cloud Storage.

I use it on the phone the majority of the time. On the phone, I appreciate how seamless it is. You don't have to be concerned about it because it's thinking in the background.

It is difficult to say what could be improved because it works in the background for me.

I haven't done much with it on a laptop, but when I first logged in, it was a little more complex than Apple. 

It was a little more complicated when compared to Apple. However, I believe they have simplified it in the most recent version. But I haven't had much access to it in a long time.

I have worked with Google Cloud Storage for three years.

We always use the most recent version. My phone automatically updates.

I am satisfied with the stability of Google Cloud Storage. I haven't had any issues with the stability.

It is for my personal use and not used by the organization.

I will continue to use it on my own.

I have not had to contact technical support. I have had no experience with them.

I have worked with Enterprise Password Manager, Domain Name once or twice.

My phone came with it pre-installed. In terms of installation, I didn't have to do anything. Everything was easy.

In my opinion, it is well-priced. In general, it's fairly priced.

Initially, I was working with the free version, now, I have updated to the paid version.

I have paid for the first year, and it's reasonably priced for my needs.

If you are on an Android platform, I would highly recommend it, but it depends on the ecosystem. However, if you're an Android user, I believe it's the most universal one for the device.

I would rate Google Cloud Storage a nine out of ten.

We use Google Cloud Storage to copy, and do machine learning, then we send the information back to Microsoft Azure.

Google Cloud Storage's most valuable feature is the native algorithms are available. Some of the algorithms are not available for the use cases that we had in Microsoft Azure. We didn't find any native algorithms and that's the reason why we decided to use the machine learning algorithms in GCP.

Google Cloud Storage could improve the integrations in a way Microsoft Azure is going about it. For Data Lake integrations, Microsoft Azure has a bunch of native pipelines available. All Google needs to do is add the same set or maybe even improve on the sets that they have. All the analytics, including the Data Lake, would then be able to sit in Google Cloud Storage.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for approximately one year.

Google Cloud Storage is fairly stable. It's as stable as Microsoft Azure. Thankfully, those customers that we had weren't hit by any downtime, which Microsoft Azure and GCP did see last year. However, our particular customer was very lucky they didn't face any downtime on either service.

The scalability of Google Cloud Storage is similar to Microsoft Azure. The scalability between GCP, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon AWS, are all at par, all three providers have the same growth pattern that they want to look at. All of them are setting up new regions and new locations. They are as scalable as each other. I don't think you would be in a position to put one ahead of the other.

Machine learning is for a very specific use case and we have six people in our analytics team that are using this solution.

Google Cloud Storage setup is only a couple of clicks and there's no installation per se. As long as the data feed pipeline is there, that part of the solution keeps running on its own and it will produce results based on what it learned.

I would recommend this solution to others if their use case is compelling enough, such as for analytics.

I rate Google Cloud Storage an eight out of ten.