Google Cloud Storage Reviews

I use Google Cloud Storage in my company for email purposes, meaning we use it to manage our corporate emails.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a good product that we use with two exchange servers in place. My company doesn't use Google Classroom.

The product's user interface is an area of concern where improvements are required. The tool could be more user-friendly and offer more designs to users as it is currently very plain and straightforward.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for six months. I use the solution's latest version, which is quite good.

From a stability standpoint, the solution is excellent. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution.

Around 200 people in my company use the solution.

If new employees join our organization, then we may expand the use of the product.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy.

One person from the IT team who operates from the headquarters of our company situated in Istanbul deals with the deployment process of the product and speaks with the company's employees, making the whole process easy without any complaints.

Only IT staff members are required to take care of the product's deployment process.

The solution can be deployed in a month.

The in-house personnel of my company carried out the product's installation phase

The product works completely fine, and because of that, the return on investment is very good.

Approximately 800 to 1,000 USD is paid towards the licensing costs of the solution. The solution is neither expensive nor cheap, meaning it is moderately priced. There are no extra costs apart from the licensing costs of the solution.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The most valuable features of Google Cloud Storage are flexibility and sustainability.

Google Cloud Storage can improve by having better integration and migration tools.

There's a concept called parallel runs. Whenever you are migrating from an assets platform to the target platform. To some extent, once you migrate into the Google Cloud Storage platform, none of the customers are ready to decommission their existing platform. In this case, you have to parallelly verify both the assets and migrated systems for them to work. Google Cloud Storage as of now, doesn't have any parallel verification system, while Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure do. Adding this feature would add value and enable them to handle large-scale migration engagement.

Google Cloud Storage needs to have a complete end-to-end solution to be competitive with the other offerings.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for approximately four years.

Google Cloud Storage is a stable solution.

Most of the clients that are using Google Cloud Storage are small-scale companies. Insurance companies and banks typically use Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure.

I have found Google Cloud Storage to be scalable but has limits.

We have reached out to Google if there are any changes in the storage or any other issues. As a Google partner, which gives us a different level of support.

I previously used Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure. 

Amazon AWS and Microsoft Azure have an end-to-end solution. Google Cloud Storage, recently entered the market, they don't have their own solutions for migration and transformation, they are depending on any other service providers.

Google Cloud Storage's initial setup is simple.

The price of Google Cloud Storage is reasonable when compared to other similar solutions.

I rate Google Cloud Storage a nine out of ten.

I use the tool for storage. I use it for personal use cases.

The tool enables me to share the storage space with four other users. I share the space with my family members. The solution is easy to use and easy to manage.

The product must provide less frequent updates.

I have been using the solution for more than three years.

The product is very stable.

It is easy to increase the storage. We have to pay more to get more storage.

The customer support is very good. I have contacted support via chat, email, and phone calls. The team provides quick service.

The solution does not require any setup.

The solution is very cheap. I pay around INR 2000 per year. I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. The tool is affordable.

We can use the tool for a wide number of applications, like Google Docs and Google Sheets. The most important thing I am using it for is Google Photos. It is the best solution available in the market.

Overall, I rate the product a ten out of ten.

We used the solution for Persistent Disk. It was integral because the input data was stored via the solution. This data was then fetched via self-made software. It was part of a processing chain.

I could store any type of file using the solution. The product could be implemented into my code. Also, I trust Google products. It was the most important factor in why I used the solution. It had every feature that we needed.

It was not easy to reach the storage because there were different network zones. We were able to implement things, but it was not that easy.

I have been using the product since 2020.

The product was running smoothly. Sometimes the product had issues syncing the visualization, but it was not related to the cloud storage. I could run the whole pipeline with my input. I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten.

The solution was scalable enough. We didn’t have massive use cases, so it took a few milliseconds to run. I rate the product’s scalability a ten out of ten.

We had the best support ever.

The initial setup was easy. I deployed the tool myself.

The solution was very cheap compared to other products. I rate the solution’s pricing a ten on a scale of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap.

I used the product three months ago. Nowadays, they have a dedicated line through which we can connect directly. The use cases are automated and dependable. We had a good experience getting back to this product. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

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 using Google Cloud Storage for my photo, work files, documents, and a lot of PDFs.

The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is the shared folder.

Google Cloud Storage could improve by having better integration with Microsoft Office files. When I open a Google document I would like it to be able to be opened with Microsoft. You can already open Google documents in Microsoft Office.

I have used Google Cloud Storage for approximately 10 years.

Google Cloud Storage is stable. I have not seen any downtime and the cloud has been integrated with my local storage. Google has the feature for local implementation.

The scalability is good in Google Cloud Storage. I only need to purchase more storage if I want to expand.

I am using this solution for my office and we have a total of eight people using the solution. We plan to increase our usage in the future.

I have not contacted the support from Google Cloud Storage. However, it would be helpful if Google Cloud Storage had a quick support option when things might not be working correctly. For example, in the past, we have had issues with 
synchronization. However, this problem has now been fixed.

The initial setup of Google Cloud Storage is straightforward.

We do not have to pay for a license for Google Cloud Storage but there is a subscription that needs to be paid.

I rate Google Cloud Storage an eight out of ten.

We use it mostly for document storage and rarely for document sharing. 

It allows us to store documents when our internal data storage is insufficient. 

The best feature is the ease of use. You don't have to be savvy or learn about it in advance to use it. 

It could be made even more secure and allow for more storage. 

We have been using it two to three years. 

The solution is stable and fast with reliable internet connection. 

I haven't had any problems, so haven't had a need to contact them. 

We used internal storage but space was limited. 

We really didn't even need to learn using the videos, it is very easy to use. 

I'd rate it a nine because of ease of use. 

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.