We like Google Firebase hosting and authentication and also the excellent cloud functionality. Our team found the flexibility of handling and dealing with the database through EDL to be very useful. We also like that it has security rules to control database read/write operations in real time. We feel the stability and performance of Google Firebase to be very good.
We feel it would be advantageous for Google Firebase to have capabilities to work offline. If Google Firebase had faster migration and support for more languages it would be a more attractive solution.
Amazon AWS has been great in helping us move clients easily and seamlessly to the cloud and offers a wide range of cloud services within the growing AWS ecosystem. It interacts very well with on-premise data centers. You can scale up to an unlimited number of processes very quickly. They offer a price forecasting and billing dashboard broken down by service, with budgets and alerts that have helped us recognize and shut down services we no longer needed (thereby reducing costs), which has been a very big win for us overall.
You really have to watch your costs for processes and such if you go with AWS, as they can add up very quickly. Also, although AWS is available globally, not all service centers offer every service, so it causes some functionality issues in different markets.
Microsoft Azure is extremely scalable with the capability to build an environment quickly. The automation and agility of Microsoft Azure is very valuable. It offers a great information protection feature - you can create custom labels for different documents and files. This keeps data more organized and secure.
Support with Microsoft Azure depends on the plan you purchase; lower-tier plans get limited support. Microsoft Azure can be a very expensive solution overall and can be complex to set up and manage. Integration with other products needs to be better. Microsoft Azure seems to be a bit slow in catching up with what other solutions have to offer.
Conclusion:
All of these solutions are very good and offer many of the same features and perform similar functions and capabilities. Although Google Firebase tends to be a slightly cheaper and more flexible option, at the end of the day it boils down to which ecosystem you or your client are more heavily vested with as each of these solutions has attributes that make them more valuable and more efficient within their prescribed ecosystem.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Oracle and others in Infrastructure as a Service Clouds (IaaS). Updated: January 2025.
Infrastructure as a Service Clouds offer scalable computing resources required for IT infrastructure, significantly reducing the need for physical hardware. Businesses can deploy complex applications without extensive infrastructure investment.Enterprises utilize Infrastructure as a Service Clouds to access flexible and scalable computing solutions. This service model allows organizations to rent compute resources such as servers, storage, and networking components on a pay-as-you-go basis....
We like Google Firebase hosting and authentication and also the excellent cloud functionality. Our team found the flexibility of handling and dealing with the database through EDL to be very useful. We also like that it has security rules to control database read/write operations in real time. We feel the stability and performance of Google Firebase to be very good.
We feel it would be advantageous for Google Firebase to have capabilities to work offline. If Google Firebase had faster migration and support for more languages it would be a more attractive solution.
Amazon AWS has been great in helping us move clients easily and seamlessly to the cloud and offers a wide range of cloud services within the growing AWS ecosystem. It interacts very well with on-premise data centers. You can scale up to an unlimited number of processes very quickly. They offer a price forecasting and billing dashboard broken down by service, with budgets and alerts that have helped us recognize and shut down services we no longer needed (thereby reducing costs), which has been a very big win for us overall.
You really have to watch your costs for processes and such if you go with AWS, as they can add up very quickly. Also, although AWS is available globally, not all service centers offer every service, so it causes some functionality issues in different markets.
Microsoft Azure is extremely scalable with the capability to build an environment quickly. The automation and agility of Microsoft Azure is very valuable. It offers a great information protection feature - you can create custom labels for different documents and files. This keeps data more organized and secure.
Support with Microsoft Azure depends on the plan you purchase; lower-tier plans get limited support. Microsoft Azure can be a very expensive solution overall and can be complex to set up and manage. Integration with other products needs to be better. Microsoft Azure seems to be a bit slow in catching up with what other solutions have to offer.
Conclusion:
All of these solutions are very good and offer many of the same features and perform similar functions and capabilities. Although Google Firebase tends to be a slightly cheaper and more flexible option, at the end of the day it boils down to which ecosystem you or your client are more heavily vested with as each of these solutions has attributes that make them more valuable and more efficient within their prescribed ecosystem.