Google Cloud Storage Reviews

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.

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.

My primary use case of this solution is file storage. You can store almost everything in there—files of all formats—and the storage capacity is pretty good. I believe the drive capacity is 15GB or so. This is a cloud-based solution, so you're always using the latest version. 

Some of the most valuable features are how convenient and easy to use this solution is. It's very user-friendly and meets all my requirements. 

Google Cloud Storage could be improved by increasing the drive capacity. 

I have been using this solution for many years now. 

This solution is stable. 

This solution is scalable. The drive could have more capacity. There is easily a minimum of around 70% to 75% of users in my organization who use this Google Cloud Storage. 

I have never contacted technical support, but I know friends who have. My friends gave me very positive feedback about getting immediate support. I've heard Google's support is very good. 

I have used Dropbox too, but I usually prefer Google Cloud Storage. When I started using Google Cloud Storage, it was easy to use and met all my requirements, so I haven't switched back since. 

Since this is a cloud-based solution, installation is pretty straightforward.

I implemented this solution myself. 

I use the free version and have never paid for any extra storage. I have been able to manage in whatever free spaces are given. 

I rate this solution a 9.5 to 10 out of 10. 

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.

Before I joined the bank, I was working as a consultant. All my documents are on the cloud so that they are available to me from any location. 

The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Storage is that I can link it with my PC. Everything syncs locally. Because they are on the cloud, I can access them from any device at any time. This includes my mobile. 

The solution is good, however, it would benefit from increased storage without the additional cost.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for more than 10 years.

The solution is stable and secure.

Google Cloud Storage is scalable. Currently, my wife and I are using it for our personal needs.

The purpose of Google Storage is to sell it. The product is subscription-based. When you pay, you will get more storage.

Anyone looking at using Google Cloud Storage should go ahead and implement the solution. Overall, I rate Google Cloud Storage a nine out of 10.

I use the solution to store photographs and documents. 

Everything I store in the solution is available on all of my devices. I assume the solution is secure because I often get security notices. 

The solution works fine.

I have been using the free solution for years and the paid solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. You just pay for the storage you need. 

I previously used OneDrive. 

There is no setup for the solution, you just sign up and start using it. 

My requirements are minimal, but the cost of additional storage could be cheaper. 

I rate the solution an eight to nine. 

I use Google Cloud Storage for backup and storage of my data.

Google Cloud Storage's most valuable features are that it's easy to use and navigate, and it's not expensive.

An area for improvement is that when you share with others, they can see all your folders instead of just those you share. Only the folders you specifically share should be visible.

I've been using Google Cloud Storage for over ten years.

Google Cloud Storage is a stable product.

Google Cloud Storage's scalability is very good.

I would recommend Google Cloud Storage as a secure, inexpensive, and user-friendly backup solution. I would give it a rating of nine out of ten.

I use Google Cloud Storage for my personal use for storage. It is the most common and well-known.

I am satisfied with this solution.

The performance is acceptable.

It's simple to use. You can easily find the function you require by looking at the bottom of any page.

It would be better to assign storage usage to different categories, because storage capacity is cumulative, if your Google album and email are both full, you will be unable to send or receive email.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage for five years.

We are working with the most recent version.

Google Cloud Storage is a stable solution.

It is for my personal use, I am the only user of this solution.

I have not contacted technical support.

For my personal computers, I have Windows.

Previously, I worked with One Drive.

There is no installation because everything is done in the cloud.

There are no licensing fees.

 I am not an expert in log management. I am just looking for a useful tool in the SRE field. I am just conducting a study. I'm an intern at our company, and I try to assist them with their research, but I have no idea what's going on in our company. I simply present my research.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested.

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