Google Workspace Reviews

We use G Suite Enterprise mainly for communication in the form of emails and chat but it has multiple usages.

G Suite Enterprise is user-friendly, and the technical toolkits and other information are on the website. Additionally, the technical documents are comprehensive.

We noticed that sometimes when we forward emails to somebody, it is being relocated as part of the communication somewhere else. The traceability and other features should be improved.

I have been using G Suite Enterprise for approximately four years.

G Suite Enterprise has been highly stable.

The scalability of G Suite Enterprise is very good and it is one of the distinguishing features is separates your product from competitors.

We have approximately 500 users using this solution in my organization.

We might increase usage of this solution but we will have to wait and see what happens with the COVID phenomenon to subside, we hope for normalcy.

We have found the technical support to be average. The technical team from Google is available on the web

We have used many other solutions previously, such as Microsoft.

The initial setup of G Suite Enterprise was straightforward.

In our organization, the implementation took four days and on the fifth day, we were able to roll it out.

We used a consultant from Google to help us with the implementation. We had a good experience with them.

I rate G Suite Enterprise a seven out of ten.

We have not faced any problems in integrating the applications that were earlier on Microsoft Office. We have also not faced problems with accessing our data.

All the Microsoft Office features are available in Google Workspace. We have not faced any problems. The synchronization is much better than Microsoft Office. The integration with Microsoft and non-Microsoft products is seamless. We use multi-factor authentication or encryption for data security and user privacy. The admin controls in Google Workspace are effective.

Microsoft has Copilot. Integrating Copilot with Google Workspace is slightly difficult. I would like to see more integration with different platforms. There are some aesthetics on the AI components that we are working around.

I have been using the solution for many years.

The tool is more stable than other products.

The tool is scalable. There are 57 hospitals, and every hospital has more than 1000 users. We have plans to increase the usage. Some prefer using Office 365. We have given them the freedom to choose what they use.

The initial setup is straightforward. The process is seamless. I do not have to do any extra setup. We do not need documentation. The product is cloud-based. The deployment is automated.

The solution was deployed in-house.

The real-time collaboration and integration of data and other applications is seamless.

The cost is distributed among the hospitals. We pay annually. We receive corporate discounts. The pricing is reasonable.

We prefer Google Workspace over Office 365. The setup process of Office 365 is a bit complex. A lot of features in Office 365 are not documented.

The solution can be used on any device. The data security and user privacy are okay. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

The solution is primarily used for a variety of purposes. We use it for mailboxes, documentation, et cetera. 

Generally, people take it due to the fact that they think it's cheap. That's what I've actually found. A lot of the people who go with Workspace think it's inexpensive.

It's stable. There isn't really any downtime. 

We find the product to be scalable. 

In general, it is not living up to expectations.

It's hard to get backups and to get things restored. 

The initial setup is not intuitive at all. 

Technical support could be better.

I've worked with the solution for six to 18 months. 

The stability is fine. It's on par with Microsoft, for example. It works. It doesn't have that much downtime. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution can scale. You can scale quite a bit. It's not an issue at all. 

At one point, we had several hundred mailboxes. Now, we have about 50 left. We're moving away from the solution.

Technical support leaves a lot to be desired. They need to improve their services.

I've also worked with Microsoft. I prefer 365 to Google. 

I found the initial setup to be difficult. It's not very intuitive. The setup is cumbersome. It gets difficult when I have to pull information back in. I find it to be very fickle.

There are free and paid tiers of the product. 

If you want to get something just for personal use, it is okay. For a corporation, in terms of traceability and making sure you can get your information if something goes wrong, it's brutal. The infrastructure is not intuitive and technical support isn't great. 

When you've got issues, and you need to restore information or back information up, it's a nightmare. Even when you're exporting information out from the Workspace, when it exports it, you look at it, and it's just a mess. I would not recommend this solution to others. I'd rate it one out of ten.

Our emails and everything are from Google at the moment, and that's it. In terms of apps, mostly, we are using Google Sheets and Google Meet - all the basic features.

There are a lot of apps and features that make it easy to share. There's Google Meet and Sheets, for example. You can use them everywhere, and there are even some free licenses. However, we've been using Google Meet for meetings, as many employees work remotely. Even my manager is actually working overseas. We continuously use Google Meet for meetings or Sheets for anything we need to share. These two apps, aside from email, are what we use most. 

The initial setup is simple. 

It's stable.

We find the solution easy to scale.

The pricing is very good.

I would rather migrate from Google to Microsoft, as I prefer Microsoft. However, it depends on the company's direction. I'm unsure of improvements, having only worked on it for a little more than a month. The features in Microsoft Outlook are way much better than in Gmail. They provide even for writing an email, for example. It's way more professional with Microsoft than with Google.

Gmail needs to improve. With Microsoft, you can use it on the web version, and you can use Microsoft Outlook. Google has the web version. However, they don't have something like Microsoft Outlook in a way that seems to be as professional.

I haven't explored all of the current features yet. I'm just using the features that I need. That said, I just use Microsoft instead for the things I find lacking in Google. For example, while I know Microsoft Office, Excel, Word, and all of that stuff are similar to Google Sheets, I tend to use Microsoft instead since I can access and understand how to use those apps better.

The company has used it for many years. However, I actually recently joined this company a month and a half ago. As far as I know, they have been using it for about five years. 

It is stable. That said, I haven't done any intense work on it. It's just pretty simple applications and simple features that I use. It hasn't given us any issues. 

We have about a thousand email accounts with Google.

It's easy to scale. We can upgrade as needed whenever we want. 

I've never dealt with support. We have experienced any technical difficulties with Google so far. They're in contact with the sales or team to provide us with the solutions and emails and stuff like that, and that's it.

We are using Microsoft 365 apps so that our users can have access to the Microsoft Office applications, so this is what we are currently using.

I'm not a very big fan of Google since I'm more familiar with Microsoft Outlook and applications. Microsoft is good on a professional level. Microsoft provides Microsoft Teams and Outlook and other applications, similar to Google Workspace, however, from my point of view, it's better.

We are used to Microsoft since they have been the leader in the market for so long, so they have developed so much. That said, Microsoft could be expensive compared to Google. On the other hand, from Google's side, Google still has the feel of personal or consumer features. They haven't yet reached the level of professionalism as Microsoft. The good thing is, they are easy to use and could be slightly less expensive than Microsoft.

Setting up the product is pretty simple. I use Google for the personal, so I was using it for personal emails, so switching to the corporate email makes no difference for me as if I'm using my personal email. 

In general, it's not a problem to set everything up. I'd rate it a five out of five in terms of ease of setup.

I do not handle the licensing aspect of the solution. It's not something that I deal with directly.

That said, I'd rate it a four out of five in terms of affordability. It's very affordable. It costs less than the Microsoft equivalent, for example. 

We are end-users and customers. 

I would recommend it based on the ease of use, and for beginners or people who are only used to having personal emails and stuff like that. New users won't face any difficulty as they will be pretty much used to working on it on a personal level. However, for big enterprises or more professional organizations, I would still recommend Microsoft.

Overall, I would rate it seven out of ten.

Our administrator has it set up so that we can share the Calendar and Gmail, we can send Gmail outside, but we cannot include any outsiders in the documents. It is possible to change that, but that's the way our administrator has set it up, that it's totally a private environment.

We use Gmail, we use Calendar, we use Drive and Drive includes presentations, although their presentations aren't great, documents and spreadsheets, workbooks, which are multiple spreadsheets. I think that's it. But the presentation is not great so we don't use it very much.

The document sharing in which multiple people can work on the same document. To go along with that is the archiving of documents. If you mess up a document, it's easy to go get a previous version.

The problem with the presentation is that if you upload a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation and you convert it to Google presentation, the slides or pictures, their images are not editable. You can't edit the slides that you brought in. They're just images.

That's a big defect in this. That's why we almost never use it because it converts Microsoft slides into pictures.

Another thing that would be nice is to have more storage because each person has 15 gigabytes and I just hit 90% again. Then I have to go in and delete a bunch of emails and I hate losing my old emails, but I don't have any choice. That's the limitation. 

I have been using it for nine years since I've been at my company.

As far as stability, it's 100% stable. I've never seen it ever fail in any way.

There are around 60 users who use it. We use it constantly 24/5, we're not open on the weekends. We have around the clock shifts. So it's in use all the time.

There's no maintenance required. I think this latest change the administrator made was probably the first change he's made in two years. 

I wasn't there for the setup but I know the guy who's the administrator and I'm sure he had to make a bunch of selections like the one I mentioned earlier that ours is private. Our documents are private. We can't share outside the company. 

Recently on Calendar, it kept trying to put us to assume that any event was a Google meeting. It's Google's product. It's called Google Meet. Of course, we can use Meet, which used to be called Hangouts. And we do once in a while, we use Google Hangouts if our other chat system is down. But when you set up a meeting the default was to put us into Google Meet. Then if we were using some other tool, people would get confused. They'd say, "Well, is the meeting on Google Meet or is it on GoToMeeting or is it on Zoom?" Et cetera. So our administrator recently changed it so that that default is not there. And so if you want Google Meet, you have to select it. I would say probably when he initially set it up, it might've taken him half an hour to find out what people wanted and then put in the selections- 30 minutes maybe.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

Google is trying to implement a telephone system on top of it. I would say, wait and see, because that's a new product, and wait and see if it's going to work and if it's going to cause you problems.

We use G-Suite for updating documents. We are implementing it in two stages. In the first stage, we are only using Google Drive, Chat, Sheets, Slides, and we're working toward replacing Microsoft Office 2010. It's deployed in the cloud, which is why we need Google One login to act as the single sign-on.

The first phase is Google Open, which uses Google Drive, and the second phase will be Google Connect, which will be replacing Microsoft Outlook with Gmail. Beyond that, we're also going to get rid of Microsoft Active Directory, which lists users and systems.

Our company builds commercial aircraft, like airplanes and helicopters, manufactured in various countries, so it's a global supply chain. In a multinational company like this, you need to share documents across all these different locations in Europe, North America, or South America.

We're also using G-Suite in manufacturing, so we use big-screen TVs to share documents and update information. It's a touch screen, so it's a big panel on wheels displaying diagrams, engine repairs, and that type of thing.

We're replacing a mishmash of different solutions with one fully integrated product.

G-Suite is excellent for what we're trying to do, but it could use some extra features. For example, it would be helpful if we had a seamless way to convert Excel macros to Google Sheets. We use the OneLogin to authenticate users logging into G-Suite. We'd like to see a lot of the same information provided from Microsoft Active Directory, such as the user's location, telephone number, etc. If G-Suite could develop this type of service, that would be amazing.

I've been using G-Suite Enterprise for the last eight months.

So far, Google seems to be a more stable environment than our current on-premise Microsoft solution that we're replacing.

G-Suite is easy to scale. With an on-premise environment, you have hardware limitations, like hard drive space, server CPU, RAM, etc. You don't have those limitations with a cloud platform because Google has server farms and unlimited hard drive space. So you're going from an environment where you have limitations to one that doesn't.

I'm unsure how many users we have worldwide because our global user footprint includes implementations in France, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Canada, the United States, Mexico, and Brazil. So I couldn't give an accurate number of how many users will be onboarded in the next two years.

We're planning to expand our usage through integrating with other solutions. When I log in, I have around six applications that use the single sign-on, but we will onboard more. We're switching over from the Microsoft environment, like Excel macros, or connecting to the databases and pulling down data from SAP. All of that functionality will be replicated within Google Workspace.

I have never used Google support. I'm also a big Google user outside of the company of Google Workspace. I have a personal Google One account that gives me 1 terabyte of data. And most Google support is self-serve. I do a Google search for help, so it's all pretty straightforward. I've never had a situation where I needed to contact somebody.

We had a bundle of things, including Microsoft servers and Microsoft Outlook email. Other things like file transfer would be covered under SFTP, and we used a product called Axway. 
If you're transferring files between countries, you need to do some encryption like PGP. We use Stormshield for email file transfer. But when you get to larger files, like over 15 gigabytes, you need an SFTP server. If you're transferring a video, then you're going to put it on Google Drive, and because it's authenticated, you can do those file transfers.

On our end, the deployment process is signing up the users. They submit a form with their department and email address, and that's how they get authenticated. I am a senior desktop analyst, so I set up the users, provide them with a laptop or desktop, and set them up with services like Google Workspace. I'm part of the provisioning process. Our headquarters in France handled the primary deployment, and we provide end-user support. I never was involved in the actual setup or implementation.

The only maintenance necessary is the authentication platform instead of the OneLogin product. We're deploying Google Workspace and ServiceNow, which is my primary application as a support person. I can pass through authentication when I'm in the office through OneLogin. If I'm logging in externally on a non-company computer, I can use OneLogin authentication on my phone to get into ServiceNow.

We're in between phase one and phase two of our implementation, so the real cost savings is going to be the ease of use and reduced support cost.

I would not be able to say how much the company paid for the enterprise solution. But from an end-user perspective, I can say that Google One is reasonable. I know schools and small companies use G-Suite. So if public and non-profit enterprises use it, then I don't think the price is a limitation.

I rate G-Suite Enterprise nine out of 10. If you're looking at implementing an application through G-Suite and using the single sign-on, you need to bring on people with a different skill set. For example, if you're replacing those Excel macros, you need somebody who knows the Apps Script programming language. Procuring that knowledge and those skills is the real cost.

People looking to implement G-Suite need to evolve and change their mindset from an on-premise solution to a cloud solution. When working on a cloud solution, you need to retrain your employees. We also set employees up with a trainer when we onboard them. This is a short session that bridges the gap between what they've traditionally used, like SharePoint or sharing files via Excel, and moving toward sharing files between departments on Google Drive.

You also need to become cross-functional in how you utilize the product. For example, we might have one senior marketing person or somebody overseeing technical publications in each country. If you're going to share documents in common, you need to identify who those individuals are and share them with the team.

We use Google Workspace for email and also for Google tools like Calendar. We're a customer of Google Cloud Solutions.

It helped us a lot because we use not just email but Calendar and Google Meet daily. Also, Google Spreadsheet, the live presentations, and Google Slides. Those are the tools we use today, especially Google Meet and Gmail.

For project management, we use the Jira solution. We put our projects into a team, distribute tasks, and collaborate. We use Jira for task management and to track whether tasks are completed.

Google Meet is the most valuable function for me. It has enhanced collaboration in our team.

We started using AI, especially for creating presentations. We are also trying to use some artificial intelligence to automate spreadsheets. It's still at the beginning, but we have started, so the results are good but not perfect yet.

We would like to use something within Google Workspace for project management, but we didn't find it there. We use Jira because we are familiar with it. But if Google Workspace could provide a solution, it would help us a lot because then it would be integrated with Calendar and other tools.

I have been using it since the beginning of our company. So, it has been six months.

It's very good, very stable. We never had any performance or availability problems with Workspace.

It's fine. Every time we need something, we are able to find it. We also have no problems implementing new things. We're pretty satisfied with Workspace.

We never contacted Google Workspace support.

We used personal Gmail, which is not Workspace, at the very beginning. Then we moved to Workspace for business privileges.

I used a different solution. We basically use Hubspot, Jira, and Google Workspace - only these three tools.

It was quite easy and straightforward.

The setup took a couple of hours. It's not complicated.

It's what we use, so it helps us. It's expensive, but we don't have another tool to create this integrated environment where we can have team meetings, calendars synced, and so on. So, we pay for this integration within the Google environment. It's expensive for us, as we don't have enough customers yet, but we're going to get them.

Pricing is something concerning. We find the solution very expensive. It's a concern because every time we add a new user, we have to add a license at a per-user price. We consider it expensive. Today, it's our most expensive bill.

We didn't evaluate other options. We just moved to Workspace and didn't check the market.

I would recommend it. Just take care of the costs, but in general, I would recommend it. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. The only problem I see today is that it's a bit expensive for us. We are in Latin America and have to convert US dollars to our local currency, and the exchange becomes expensive.

Most of the customers use the solution for basic and standard planning and stuff like that. They do have a variety of use cases. 

They have security parameters, and internal access to security policies for accessing email. 

It's easy to use. Most of the features regarding security are good. 

It offers better information and dashboard reports and customization activities. The VPN contribution is good. 

It has a lot of very useful features.

They are starting their own support system. However, most of it is still knowledge-based. My engineers are more knowledgeable than the G Suite support engineer sometimes. Their support needs to be better in India.

Right now, the software is pretty complete and it has a lot of features that are great. It's not lacking. 

The login and restriction to move are very difficult.

There's a bit of a learning curve.

I've worked with the solution for the last six months. 

The industry standard has been maintained, so I don't see any difficulties for implementation with G Suite. They have that GAM tool available which is most difficult. The work state is very lengthy.

It is stable. Every product has different issues. For example, if you go with Mercedes, you definitely learn Mercedes has different issues. This is the same with Google. However, we haven't had any trouble in relation to reliability.

We have between 10,000 and 30,000 users. 

It doesn't seem scalable. If I were to upgrade or degrade it will take me too much time with the licensing process that's available. That might be an issue in software. I'm not sure about that.

It's a good support system. G Suite is hiring people who are really good at communication skills, however, in India, there is no such approach. You need to rely on the knowledge base and not support. If your communication skill is not good it's hard to deliver the solution or give the technical answer.

The solution is not complex to set up. It is very straightforward and simple to implement. 

The industry standard has been maintained, so I don't see any difficulties for implementation with G Suite.

In a single console, I can manage multiple customers. They have very similar panels and similar options available in the GAM tool. Connecting with the GAM suite can be difficult to manage multiple customers and servers in the script.

Whether or not your company receives any ROI depends on the organization. Currently, a basic plan starts from the 30GB. There is also one plan which will cost another 2,000 rupees where they give a fuller picture, however, the plan costs are too high. If you consider the Indian market, there are people who do not have web access and they consider their mobile configuration or desktop. If the user is not going to use all the GB, it may not be cost-effective.

If the user is not using on that amount of data, so why should I waste 2,000 rupees for the license?

The costs vary. It may be somewhere around 10,000 to 20,000 rupees. It depends on how much the customer plans to use. There isn't a standard license. The cost depends on multiple factors.

There are six plans starting from 2,000 rupees, for a standard setup. The features you add will also add to the price. 

I'm a reseller.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.