4 ms·

There are other tradeoffs between cloud providers that are important to keep in mind here. In my experience, GCP has been easier to get started with, and has of

There are other tradeoffs between cloud providers that are important to keep in mind here. In my experience, GCP has been easier to get started with, and has offerings that are by-and-large more comprehensible. One thing I really appreciate is that a lot of their client libs have automatic auth within GCP (last time I used AWS this wasn't the case or I didn't know about it). As someone who hasn't been burned by it personally, it is hard to quantify the actual risk and maintenance cost of GCP's deprecation policy, but I know decision makers at larger organizations that are rightfully afraid of it.

manquer 6y ago
Easier to get started ? Their UI , IAM architecture and firebase being kind of separate is so confusing . Aws used to be simpler , while they are screwing it up now, the recent route53 upgrade was terrible , a single click action has now become 4-5 clicks they are still better than GCP. Azure has the really the best interface (outside of DO) , it is easy to go to related and nested resource in one freaking app. Both google and aws end up forcing you to open three four tabs to setup interconnected apps . DO interface is really really good ,however they don’t have the complexity of features that the big three do , so not a fair comparison
- micimize 6y ago
  That's just been my experience – I remember having much more pains trying to get AWS IAMs and permissions to work, and I really like that they give you suggestions like "this machine could be smaller" or "this role never actually uses all these permissions." Also I haven't worked _that_ much with firebase, but it seems like a great example of the benefit of using GCP. Firebase is a cohesive and accessible solution to a lot of what can be fairly nightmarish technical problems. This kind of thing will always depend on the project/team/team size, but I'm just trying to say that there are significant benefits to GCP that should be considered.
  - manquer 6y ago
    Google are not competing with DO for developer mindspace, for large enterprises stability matters a lot more than new features and enterprise support matters too, for startups serving enterprises they don't do much either, what's left is consumer focused companies like SnapChat who can thrive on just innovative new tech. I can get Microsoft on a call anytime, I have account managers responsible who talk to me atleast once a month, reach their product teams, get preview access, get the MS account manager of my customer to help with a deal, put them in front of my customer, help with compliance, even get their sales guys to recommend my product. To a lesser extent I can do a lot of that with AWS too, with even sub $100k/year spends they will still put an account manager for you. I am not sure any of this was possible with GCP for most customers. It is extremely hard to get a human from Google to talk to you even at $100k+/year GCP spends. Google has contracted a lot of partners to do all the heavy lifting in support for them so they don't have to do the hard work. It does not work, the partners can not do much beyond what is available on the portal or clarify beyond the documentation. Azure serves enterprises really well, and has really made effort with developers and their support for startups in fantastic, AWS is not as good yet, however it feels like they are really trying and their tech popularity works in their favour and they care about backward compatibility a lot S3 API from 2006 still works. With Google and GCP it does not even look as though they are trying at all.
    - EE84M3i 6y ago
      >S3 API from 2006 still works An interesting note is that Amazon actually planned to EOL part of this vis-a-vis what path to address objects at, and then walked it back (for buckets created before a certain date): https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-s3-path-deprecation-plan-the-rest-of-the-story/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-s3-path-deprecation-... I think the behavior is still considered "old style" if not explicitly "deprecated", but is "supported".
      - manquer 6y ago
        Yes. That decision to continue to support is costing them a ton of money every day. The older API is very expensive, This is also why backblaze originally did not add a S3 compatibility layer.[1] This is exactly the kind of commitment I expect from Microsoft or Amazon, it is why enterprises pay premium for a product. In a similar situation I imagine Google would have just sent a note and with a window of few months and shutdown the old API. Great for innovation and keeping your tech cutting edge, not so much for the customers who are not as agile as they and can only move slowly if at all. [1] https://www.backblaze.com/blog/design-thinking-b2-apis-the-hidden-costs-of-s3-compatibility/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/design-thinking-b2-apis-the-h...

manquer 6y ago

Easier to get started ? Their UI , IAM architecture and firebase being kind of separate is so confusing . Aws used to be simpler , while they are screwing it up now, the recent route53 upgrade was terrible , a single click action has now become 4-5 clicks they are still better than GCP. Azure has the really the best interface (outside of DO) , it is easy to go to related and nested resource in one freaking app. Both google and aws end up forcing you to open three four tabs to setup interconnected apps . DO interface is really really good ,however they don’t have the complexity of features that the big three do , so not a fair comparison

micimize 6y ago
That's just been my experience – I remember having much more pains trying to get AWS IAMs and permissions to work, and I really like that they give you suggestions like "this machine could be smaller" or "this role never actually uses all these permissions." Also I haven't worked _that_ much with firebase, but it seems like a great example of the benefit of using GCP. Firebase is a cohesive and accessible solution to a lot of what can be fairly nightmarish technical problems. This kind of thing will always depend on the project/team/team size, but I'm just trying to say that there are significant benefits to GCP that should be considered.
- manquer 6y ago
  Google are not competing with DO for developer mindspace, for large enterprises stability matters a lot more than new features and enterprise support matters too, for startups serving enterprises they don't do much either, what's left is consumer focused companies like SnapChat who can thrive on just innovative new tech. I can get Microsoft on a call anytime, I have account managers responsible who talk to me atleast once a month, reach their product teams, get preview access, get the MS account manager of my customer to help with a deal, put them in front of my customer, help with compliance, even get their sales guys to recommend my product. To a lesser extent I can do a lot of that with AWS too, with even sub $100k/year spends they will still put an account manager for you. I am not sure any of this was possible with GCP for most customers. It is extremely hard to get a human from Google to talk to you even at $100k+/year GCP spends. Google has contracted a lot of partners to do all the heavy lifting in support for them so they don't have to do the hard work. It does not work, the partners can not do much beyond what is available on the portal or clarify beyond the documentation. Azure serves enterprises really well, and has really made effort with developers and their support for startups in fantastic, AWS is not as good yet, however it feels like they are really trying and their tech popularity works in their favour and they care about backward compatibility a lot S3 API from 2006 still works. With Google and GCP it does not even look as though they are trying at all.
  - EE84M3i 6y ago
    >S3 API from 2006 still works An interesting note is that Amazon actually planned to EOL part of this vis-a-vis what path to address objects at, and then walked it back (for buckets created before a certain date): https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-s3-path-deprecation-plan-the-rest-of-the-story/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-s3-path-deprecation-... I think the behavior is still considered "old style" if not explicitly "deprecated", but is "supported".
    - manquer 6y ago
      Yes. That decision to continue to support is costing them a ton of money every day. The older API is very expensive, This is also why backblaze originally did not add a S3 compatibility layer.[1] This is exactly the kind of commitment I expect from Microsoft or Amazon, it is why enterprises pay premium for a product. In a similar situation I imagine Google would have just sent a note and with a window of few months and shutdown the old API. Great for innovation and keeping your tech cutting edge, not so much for the customers who are not as agile as they and can only move slowly if at all. [1] https://www.backblaze.com/blog/design-thinking-b2-apis-the-hidden-costs-of-s3-compatibility/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/design-thinking-b2-apis-the-h...