We performed a comparison between Amazon AWS and Google Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."In general, the cost management in Amazon is complicated. It's not too straightforward."
"I like that it helps us do everything really fast, and its advanced services."
"The capacity to grow dynamically based on our needs is most valuable. We can increase resources dynamically. It is also very reliable and fast to implement."
"Very good automation and very stable."
"Amazon is a really good solution with high performance. They offer more connectors than some of their competitors, such as Microsoft Azure."
"It's very stable and the performance is good."
"It is intuitive, easy to deploy, and rather quick to deploy and set up. There are a number of native services in the ecosystem. These services are built into the cloud and are mature enough to support you in many ways."
"It is flexible. It is quite comfortable to use for organizations."
"The solution can scale as well."
"Google Cloud has low downtime."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The solution is fairly easy to deploy."
"Technical support has been good."
"Good storage and ease of access."
"The performance is a valuable feature."
"The most useful feature of Google Cloud is that it's basically completely managed or fully managed. There is no administration or maintenance needed from the user, and it's very simple to use."
"Amazon AWS could improve by being more secure and adding more features."
"The product would be better if it was more secure."
"One of the issues I'm facing is that my RDS SQL Server version 5.8 is reaching its end of life, and I need to upgrade it to a customer-wanted version. I want to do this on Graviton instances, but Graviton only starts with version 8.0 and currently doesn't support the 5.8 series. We've raised a Priority Feature Request (PFR) with AWS to have this functionality added for at least three months. This would give us enough time to upgrade our database to the 8.0 version without any issues."
"There's not much room for improvement but that being said, they can improve the overall process of the overall product features and backend."
"It would be better if there was a way to see which components were still on. We have some situations where I forget that some components are turned on. We forget some components are on, and we only see that these components are on when we see the bill at the end of the month. It would also be better if AWS had specialized firewalls or integrations with leading products. For example, a specialized firewall with content filtering. We were looking for some firewall tools, and we saw that AWS doesn't have any specialized firewall tools in its services portfolio. So, we are looking for other tools like FortKnox, Forcepoint, and Check Point because we didn't find the solutions in AWS services."
"Its only cons are on the data warehouse side. AWS' data warehouse Redshift is not as good as it should be."
"The pricing is expensive"
"Price is an area with a shortcoming in the solution that has a scope for improvement"
"The solution could be a bit cheaper."
"The price can be lowered significantly."
"We'd like the storage to be increased."
"Training in new advancements, technologies, or AI would help us understand how to best use the solution."
"Uploading documents could be simplified."
"The cost of the solution has room for improvement."
"Another issue is the applicability of local language data capturing mechanisms, which are more advanced on cloud service providers, but still there is room to grow. Also, their hybrid version isn't available in all markets worldwide, so I'm hoping that it will be released globally soon"
"The security features must be improved."
Amazon AWS is ranked 2nd in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 250 reviews while Google Cloud is ranked 4th in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 66 reviews. Amazon AWS is rated 8.4, while Google Cloud is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon AWS writes "Reliable with good security but is difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Google Cloud writes "Great for big data with off-the-charts scalability for storage and databases". Amazon AWS is most compared with Linode, OpenShift, Microsoft Azure, SAP Cloud Platform and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Google Cloud is most compared with Alibaba Cloud, Linode, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and Pivotal Cloud Foundry. See our Amazon AWS vs. Google Cloud report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) vendors and best PaaS Clouds vendors.
We monitor all Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
I have worked with AWS for 4 years now and I agree with the recommendation.
If you make some research AWS will be shown as the top solution in many white papers. We made an evaluation to compare it with Google and Azure. In our case, AWS is the most cost-effective.
Depending on the solution you are running you need to check the license cost for your servers. If you have a lot of Windows solutions Azure may be a better fit.
Regarding performance, we did have an incident where the complete region was unreachable. So, make sure to consider recovery sites.
I would like to recommend MS Azure to start with.
The reasons are:
1. I bet you're using many Microsoft tools, like Office 365, Team, etc. so you're pretty familiar with the MS UX which is excellent.
2. It's easy to start/learn Azure and configurations, they have very detailed documentation online.
3. It's relatively cheaper with Azure IaaS with good starting numbers of notes/services.