Google Cloud vs AWS CloudFormation Comparison

Its huge, a lot of functionality. Very well designed

AWS still wins for me, itd good but few steps after AWS

Compared to AWS, the deployment time on Google Cloud Platform is faster than that on AWS. GCP is cheaper than AWS. The charge mode on GCP is friendly than AWS. So for startups who do not have a great number of user request, it is more money-saving to use GCP than using AWS.

The document of Google Cloud Platform is a little messy. Sometimes it will introduce several different concepts in one section. This is confusing especially for beginners. It will be more clear to separate different concepts into individual sections instead of trying to merging them together. After all, most document readings are from beginners.

Generous sign up discounts and pricing afterwards is competitive

Not as versatile as AWS. For me, AWS is a lot better laid out too and much better documented

Has an easy to use and nicer looking interface compared to AWS and the pricing is less than AWS.

Does not have all the features of AWS and is not as popular so there is less of a community of users. Also has less customer support than AWS.

You can spin up a VM in seconds, have it connect to your VCN, and be ready to use in any environment.

Google's cloud platform is not as feature rich as AWS but they are getting closer. If I was to choose between AWS and GCP, I would probably choose AWS because of the added features.

Google Cloud has a very good web console interface. All the resources are well documented. We decided to use Google Cloud because of BigQuery. AWS does not have a product to compete with what BigQuery gives us.

The developer community for GCP is not as widespread as on AWS. You will find more help online for AWS problems.

Cheaper than other major cloud services. Very good in Machine learning and handling big data

Many features are missing as compared to AWS.

We have been looking at alternative solutions to host our web apps and Google Cloud Platform is definitely a potential suitor. In our experience cloud platforms can be unnecessarily convoluted but so far Google has provided an effective user interface. It runs well and works seamlessly with other google products.

The price to storage ratio is a little wacky. This is a common issue throughout the cloud storage world but it's something that needs to be addressed.

Très répandu sur le marché en Europe, rendant son utilisation quasiment universelle

Non compatible avec d'autre environnements cloud (aws, etc)

But still a very solid platform, we like it a lot.

Team is familiar with aws, high switching costs

Simple Web Console to manage the account Per-Second billing has saved some dollars for our company, and this is something unique with google. 24/7 Support makes your life easier especially when you get into any unknown issues.

Expensive compared to its competitors AWS, Azure .etc

GCP is very good for Google products like Maps, Tensorflow and other machine learning applications like computer vision and NLP. It is very helpful if you have data on Google Analytics and want to pull in Big Query and do some processing or visualization on Data Studio.

It is as I said, very good for data needs, it cannot replace AWS, AWS will be cheaper, stronger and powerful for your applications and infrastructure.

Pricing-wise, Google Cloud Platform is very competitive compared to AWS and Azure. The console is also relatively easy to use.

As the product grows with more features, it will inevitably become less easier to use. I think it can be a challenge for new-comers, although it won't be as overwhelming as AWS.

For setting up systems and getting people started, I prefer GCP.

Concerns about Google’s reliability in maintaining continuous service operations.

Best NoSQL supported databased which can be scaled very easy Good SQL supported databases like MySQL and PostgreSQL databased which can be scaled and highly secure Great support for IoT

It would be good Google Cloud Platform also comes with AWS IAM kind of role management. Some times feels like it is more complex than AWS

It is a good alternative from AWS and Microsoft

I dont really have any major cons pretty similar to AWS and Azure

It helps you access IColad files very quickly

Arabic language is not available Lacks features compared to AWS.

I love the way Google Cloud platform is presented. I think the UI is amazing and intuitive.

The price of Google Cloud seems more expensive than AWS.

GCP is picking up speed and has better pricing options compare to AWS and Azure. many features are way better than aws and azure as well as have better interface too.

the pricing of some of the features are pretty expensive like data and compute.

It had a lot of features and fit very nicely into the google way of doing things. Being able to migrate applications to the cloud relatively easily made it a great choice in platforms.

It isn't as fully featured/mature as AWS is in some areas.

ease of use. It is simple and isn't hard to get thwe hang of

price. bit expensive compared to AWS. ll things considered it's great

Efficient costing as billing to the “per second” of usage. Better Containerization or Kubernetes support. Specialized in Big Data, analytics and machine learning. Reliable security features. VMs does not have plethora of instance types, you can customize the instance as per requirement. Fast storage with uncapped bandwidth. 300 USD free account on signup to help understand the platform.

Lack of managed services. Less global data centers compare to AWs.

Google is the market leader in cloud market segment with its Google Cloud Platform. It has got all the necessary tools, that you may need for developing and deploying application on cloud. It works on pay as you go model, hence you will be only charged for the services, which you will be actually using and only for the duration used. Your data and applications are fully secure with Google.

The number of services are limited when compared with its competitor AWS.

Easy to use and integrate with other services.

Bit of a learning curve after using AWS for a long time.

Great performance. The fact the it charges us at a per-second basis. Private networks and an awesome selection of apps varity and some new stuff like data analysis with AI

It seems a bit more expensive then AWS which offer similar services.

The tool allows you to design your infrastructure with a fairly simple and understandable syntax.

It is not compatible with other cloud systems as do other tools that remain disconnected from the cloud used.

I like that you can easily pick up and move infrastructure when needed programmatically.

I have not found any downside to cloud formation

we can automate provisioning and decommission as well

We didn’t find any difficulty in using cloud formation

Infrastructure-as-code best practices, infrastructure configuration in a template based approach, infrastructure automation provisioning, cost savings, no manual overhead

Need support for multi cloud Infrastructure configurations similar to Terraform tool

It's super easy to create a cloud stack on any application. Cloud formation allows you to easily create a cloud stack, but also let's you manage security and roles easily.

When it comes to creating a cloud stack through the yaml file, thats when it gets super complicated. I really wish that they found a way to be more user friendly. It takes time to learn it before you finally get it right. Keep it in mind.

AWS cloud formation is a great service offering. What I like the most is that I can set up any form of cloud tech stack for my projects and automate my entire deployment lifecycle.

AWS Cloud Formation is great but sometimes if I create a few resources using cloud formation and then later if I delete those resources directly then the resource configuration lying inside cloud formation glitches, ideally it should detect that the underlying resource no longer exists and it should give an option to recreate the resource or delete the entire resource.

deployments , template creations , updates features i like most. Easy to use. can be integrated with multiple clouds

it takes more time for any activity which is most dislike of this software

It is easy to provision AWS resources and update them. It supports rollback. It also allows seeing the changes that will be applied using changesets. It is transactional , either all the resources are updated or none are.

The error messages when running the Cloudformation stacks are sometimes not easy to decipher.

It's powerful for managing the cloud using one dashboard

it not easy as know, need more detail of the knowledge

With some level of AWS experience, I was able to start using cloud formation. As I got experience with other AWS services I could easily map it to my Cloud Formation stack. So basically my cloud formation skills grow at the same time as my AWS skills grows.

I was hoping this tool also support a basic editor view which allows me to design my AWS architecture without providing all the details. More like draw.io functionality. I'd like to keep all my AWS design artifacts in AWS other than back and forth between draw.io and AWS cloud formation

We use this service to create multiple resources on the AWS cloud infrastructure. Like EC2, VPC, Route53, etc we create these services through CloudFormation.

Sometimes it takes more time to find the CloudFormation templates to create the resources on the AWS cloud.

Give you full power to develop, deploy and manage your cloud infrastructure

A bit complex to start with Sometimes you will need to dig online for proper documentation with an example