Google Cloud Reviews

We're using this solution to host all of our applications. Currently, we're in the process of migrating all the SAP servers to GCP.

There are about 2,000 people using this solution in our organization.

The performance is a valuable feature.

The price of the license could be cheaper.

We have been using this solution for a few months.

It's stable.

The scalability is good.

We pay for a monthly license.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

Google Cloud can be used to share files with no need to carry them with you since it is on the cloud. You can access it anywhere if you are traveling or if you have important documents.

Google Cloud is easy to use and accessible anywhere.

Microsoft's solution is more common, Google Cloud could improve by being more compatible with different platforms or entities.

I have been using Google Cloud for a few years.

The solution is straightforward and since I am a professional, there is no need for any support.

I have used Microsoft's solution and they have more users using it than Google Cloud.

Google Cloud has no installation since it is on the cloud.

Google Cloud should be divided into modules so that users can buy which module will satisfy them. The overall price of Google Cloud should be reduced, Microsoft is a little bit cheaper. However, if Google divided the cloud offering it would be better. For example, if someone wants to use only for OneDrive they should be able to purchase the service separately, it would reduce the price. There is a license required to use this solution for enterprises.

There is a free account, which the users can increase the size of the space. Google cloud is used in most Android Mobile device operating systems.

I have always said that Google Cloud is better than Microsoft, but the common solution is Microsoft and with some of the compatibility issues with Google Cloud, we typically choose Microsoft.

I rate Google Cloud a nine out of ten.

Public Cloud

We use this solution for email and also make use of the Google servers and related services. 

The storage available for this solution could be improved, especially compared to a solution like Microsoft which offers 1 TB of storage. Google cloud offers only 30 GB.

I have used this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The customer service team for this solution is very knowledgeable. 

There is very little setup needed for this solution. 

This solution is reasonably priced. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

For personal storage, Google Workspace, Google portal, Google video, Google file, and Google Cloud Shell for programming language.

The services that are the most helpful include Google Portal, Google Video, Google File, and Google Cloud Shell.

The performance after long-term use shows the storage is too full, and I cannot add more storage without paying for it. I want to migrate to another solution if I need to pay for additional storage. It would also be enjoyable if there is no HBase in Google Workspace.

I have been using Google Cloud for some time and am still using it.

The problem with scaling is that if I add space to Google Cloud, I must pay for it, so I want to migrate to another solution.

It's easy to deploy Google Cloud. The deployment is compatible and efficient.

If I add up space in Google Cloud, I must pay for it. The pricing of Google Cloud is considered cheap.

I have used Alibaba Cloud and found it more complex compared to Google Cloud, which is more practical.

I recommend Google Cloud to other people.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Public Cloud

Google

So far, I like all the features that I use with Google Cloud. I like it very much compared to the previous tool that we had.

The speed, security, and performance of Google Cloud are excellent.

Actually, our company doesn't venture out much to use all of the products and features covered under Google Cloud because we do have our own customizations when it comes to the setups for the company. We are trying to maximize our resources, the cost, and the assets, and we want to control it on our own.

The product's initial setup phase is a little bit difficult, so it is an area where improvements are required.

I have three months of experience with Google Cloud. My role in the company is as a researcher and a developer. I am an end-user of the tool.

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

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

We are working with approximately 300 users of the tool in our company.

The solution's technical support was average. I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

The technical support for Google's platforms are embedded under products, so we are meant to go for self-learning. My company does not have experience with human intervention when it comes to Google. Only self-learning is needed for the products.

Neutral

Right now, we have Google Cloud's Compute Engine and SQL Server, but we have not used the tools yet because we are diverting into self-hosting.

Previously, I worked with Microsoft products for my previous employer. All Microsoft products, including Office, servers, databases, and SQL Server.

As a new product for us, the product's initial setup phase is a little bit difficult.

The product's deployment phase took place over a month. I then deployed the virtual machine, VPC, the storage, and SQL Server. We ran it for a couple of days, and then we saw the billing and the cost. The cost is based on the products you used, CPUs, Storage, Memory, API access and bandwidth. We saw that the tool was great but very costly for us, and so we did not continue.

If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as an eight.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

Private Cloud

Google

I primarily use Google Cloud for analytics purposes. The data originates from our on-premise cloud system but is transferred to Google Cloud for analysis.

Regarding Google Cloud's data analytics features, I find the presentation of information and the ability to move and transform data to be the most valuable. As for machine learning capabilities, they are helpful, especially in detecting anomalies or outliers in our data. For instance, Google Cloud can identify unusual network behavior and provide recommendations on how to address or leverage these findings effectively.

I think one area that could be improved in Google Cloud is the customer support. Sometimes the integration process can be a bit complex due to format errors. Also having clearer documentation or a larger support team could really help users like me understand and resolve issues more effectively.

I have been using Google Cloud for the past four years. 

In terms of stability, I'd give Google Cloud a nine out of ten as it's very stable.

Google Cloud is scalable, which serves our organization's scaling needs well. We have multiple users directly interacting with the technology, and while we don't have immediate plans to increase usage, we would consider extending it in the future. 

As for scalability, I'd rate it a ten out of ten as it's more than enough for our needs.

Integrating Google Cloud with our existing systems has been. Deployment is super fast, and takes a couple of minutes.

Google Cloud has helped us save time, approximately around thirty to forty percent.

Google Cloud is on the expensive side for us. I don't have exact figures on the cost per year or month.

I haven't used Google Cloud for AI projects personally. But I have utilized Google AI for optimizing Google Ads campaigns. It's an automated machine learning model that uses data from websites to understand customer behavior and improve marketing strategies for better results like increasing clicks or purchases. 

My advice for those considering Google Cloud is to have a technical advisor due to its complexity. It's data-driven, stable, and scalable, which are strong advantages.

Overall, I would give it a rating of around an eight out of ten. 

Public Cloud

We use the solution for our SAP infrastructure.

The product’s infrastructure is up to the mark. The infrastructure is easy to manage. It is better than Azure and AWS. It is easy to implement the product.

DevOps must be improved. DevOps in AWS is quite easy to establish and can be easily used by startups and big companies. It is not so with Google Cloud. The product must provide AI features.

I have been using the solution for more than one and a half years.

The tool is quite stable.

The tool is scalable. We support our customers. We have around 2000 to 3000 customers.

The support is good. The third-party support could be improved.

Positive

The installation is easy. Most of my customers have Windows. VDI lags in Google Cloud. The deployment takes one month. We have more than 30 people in our technical team. We have eight to ten people to maintain the solution. Other people are involved in support or are senior employees like cloud architects. It is easy to maintain the tool.

The solution is cheaper than AWS. The licenses are annual. The cost is inclusive of support.

We are partners. People must choose Google Cloud. It is a great product. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

I use Google Cloud for services like corporate email, data collection, Google Meet, session recording, presentation, and storing important documents in the cloud.

You can use Google Cloud tools easily, even if you know how Word, Excel, or PowerPoint works. Additionally, Google Meet is simple to use regarding configuration and recording sessions.

They could integrate artificial intelligence into the applications.

We have been using Google Cloud since 2015.

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup process is simple. It takes just five minutes to complete and doesn’t require a much bigger team. You should know the access ID and password to log in.

Anybody can deploy the product.

They provide user-based licensing plans. Its plan could be less expensive.

I rate Google Cloud a nine out of ten. They should work on the cost. It is not feasible for many organizations to pay 1,500 per user.