We performed a comparison between Google Compute Engine and Microsoft Azure 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."The solution helps to direct SSH into the machine at the click of a button. It also helps to deploy container images right from the UI. There is no need to manage the containers on the machine. I also like the tool’s Spot provision model."
"The most valuable feature is auto-scaling."
"Google is managing all hardware. You don't need to provision or pre-provision your computer engine."
"The solution is readily available, and software engineers can provision it. It is scalable and allows self-service."
"The initial setup is reasonably straightforward. It's a handful of networks and a handful of computers."
"From a feature perspective, I find API integration, automation capabilities, and features like preemptive and Spot instances valuable. Migration tools have also been useful."
"It's the most engineer-friendly product compared to Amazon AWS or Azure."
"Everything is simple and useful. The initial setup is not challenging."
"The scalability is good."
"If you have large traffic amounts, Microsoft Azure will continue to provide our customers with the best storage experience."
"Feature-wise, I like its stability. Also, it is easy to access the solution and its options."
"The design of Microsoft Azure is for it to be scalable and it is scalable."
"We use Microsoft Azure for operations, email, and office applications."
"We find that it is easy to integrate with other Microsoft technologies such as Microsoft Office."
"It was easy to deploy our applications on it."
"The system is more secure, and this is valuable."
"It would be better if there was an option to change the background. Like in Gmail, there's an option to change your theme."
"The licensing process is not a very straightforward process."
"Google Compute Engine needs to have multi-region support. It would also be nice to have a tracking mechanism."
"The biggest problem is that it's got a very archaean and complex security environment that has to be very carefully set up and is easy to break."
"I would like to improve the solution’s UI while deploying a container. It is sometimes hard to figure out the container’s details and format that you want to deploy. The tool does not give you a guide to find out the error and why the container is not starting up which could be because you have configured it wrong. This is always a hit on the setup."
"I rate the product's stability around five to six out of ten."
"It has some limitations. For example, you don't get through layer two connectivity. So I've had some difficulty deploying custom VMs. For example, you can't deploy a KVM file to file directly on GCP."
"There have been instances when a customer has tried to deploy a certain number of VMs inside a project, and they come across quota issues."
"Microsoft Azure could improve by being more user-friendly and the interface could be better."
"Azure could be improved with better security. The world is changing and their security could be better. Compared to five years ago, many of these cloud systems are a lot better, especially since you can set up a private cloud and configure your services to make it more secure."
"The solution needs to offer more data analysis services."
"I think it would be good to keep making progress on giving users the ability to do action calls on Data Factory. Right now, it's mostly local. Perhaps Microsoft could add the ability to put some calls in the workflow."
"Compared with other cloud solution providers, Microsoft is not good at local support."
"I would say an improvement could be allowing for more external, third-party tools. However, I think that's their vision, how they develop the product."
"Integrate as a service. A lot of Microsoft software licensing options aren’t yet in Azure. Also, the ability to integrate with other technologies, such as other options on the market based on RISC Technologies."
"The interface is not easy to use. I'd like to see them develop a better interface, more graphical information about the resource and the consumer."
Google Compute Engine is ranked 11th in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 13 reviews while Microsoft Azure is ranked 1st in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) with 299 reviews. Google Compute Engine is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Azure is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Google Compute Engine writes "A cost-effective and quite an elastic solution ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure writes "Promotes clear, logical structures preventing impractical configurations and offers seamless integration ". Google Compute Engine is most compared with Google App Engine and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), whereas Microsoft Azure is most compared with Google Firebase, Amazon AWS, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI), Alibaba Cloud and Pivotal Cloud Foundry. See our Google Compute Engine vs. Microsoft Azure report.
See our list of best Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS) 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.