7 ms·
Google’s Cloud Loses Following Among CIOs, Survey Finds
- jread 12y agoSome quantitative data - we monitor Alexa and Fortune 500 marketshare for cloud services. This article is mostly accurate - Google has not taken much marketshare according to our stats. Currently, EC2 is 13% for Alexa 1k/10k and 11% Fortune 500. Rackspace is 5.5% Alexa 1k/10k and 19.4% Fortune 500. Google is under 1% for both, while Azure is between 1-2%. Our stats are available here: http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/12/compute-marketshare-alexa-fortune-500.html http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/12/compute-marketshare-ale... https://cloudharmony.com/cloudsquare#compare-aws:ec2-and-google:compute-and-rackspace:servers https://cloudharmony.com/cloudsquare#compare-aws:ec2-and-goo... Edit: added blog link
- ripberge 12y ago19.4% of Fortune 500 using Rackspace's cloud product sounds very high. How do you differentiate normal Rackspace customers from those using their cloud offering? I would assume they're all in the same data centers.
- jread 12y agoWe aren't able to differentiate - Rackspace stats include both cloud and dedicated.
- hangonhn 12y agoIs that chart suppose to say "VMware"? Squinting at it, it looks like "Wmware". Anyone have a link to an easier to read version?
- bengali3 12y agonice wsj. I think its showing 'WMvare'
- mrj 12y agoGood. Compute engine is crazy fast because all of the hardware isn't over allocated. Go ahead and use Amazon, I hear good things. :-)
- vlikmn 12y agoAWS performance seems better: http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/07/comparing-cloud-compute-services.html http://blog.cloudharmony.com/2014/07/comparing-cloud-compute...
- judkowitz 12y agoCloud Harmony has done some more testing since then which covers some more configurations and you will see Google does quite well - especially if you normalize by price (not in the charts, but prices are public) https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/storage#4k_Rand_IOPS https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/storage#4k_Rand_... https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/terasort https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks/compute/terasort
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- jread 12y agoI wrote that post - new GCE capabilities like pd-ssd and local SSD are very competitive for price and performance. You can review current benchmark metrics here: https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks https://cloudharmony.com/benchmarks
- dantiberian 12y agoThe question was asked to CIO's to "name their preferred public cloud provider". It's not clear to me what preferred means here. I'd bet a large number of them still have a large amount of on-premise. Does preferred mean the vendor with the highest compute workload, or the one they would pick if they were to move to the cloud? I have to think that it would be the latter, because moving that much compute workload off of Google's Cloud between 2014 and 2015 would be a big effort.
- rifung 12y agoWhile the article was informative, it'd be a lot more interesting if it went into the reason people prefer AWS. Does anyone care to comment why they or their company decided to use AWS over competing products?
- brucehart 12y agoI think Google's history of shutting down products would keep me from picking Google Cloud for a major project. If Google Cloud continues to lag behind the market, you have to think they will shut it down like Google Reader, Google Wave and a number of other products. Even if Amazon isn't perfect, I feel like AWS will be around for a long time.
- riffraff 12y agoI _think_ people were also annoyed by the GAE pricing change mess. Also, amazon is known for good support, google is known for horrible support.
- pm 12y agoReally? That was in 2011. It's now 2015.
- alrs 12y agoThe price of AWS always goes down. The price of GAE goes god-knows-where, whenever.
- pm 12y agoIt really doesn't.
- alrs 12y ago"Google App Engine Price Hike Stuns Developers" http://www.informationweek.com/cloud/platform-as-a-service/google-app-engine-price-hike-stuns-developers-/d/d-id/1099933 http://www.informationweek.com/cloud/platform-as-a-service/g...
- pm 12y agoSeeing as I can't reply to the comment in question... the price hike article you mention is in 2011. The price hike was a change of system, and everything went up because most people were using Python 2.5 which had no threading support. Python 2.7 had proper threading support, and unsurprisingly when that was enabled, everyone's cost dropped by three-quarters. Google dropped support for 2.5 two years ago. If were really worried about costs, you'd convert your App Engine app to Go.
- zzzeek 12y ago> “We attribute the Google losses to AWS winning the initial branding war over Google Cloud,” he said in an email. “Specifically the initial market share lead triggers future market share gains.” what a depressingly ignorant and dismissive explanation! How about technical merit, no? All of us preferring to run real OSes rather than some awkward proprietary sandbox, it's all just our falling for "branding" huh?
- muraiki 12y agoI haven't used it myself, but I thought Compute Engine ran normal VMs? Could you give some more detail? Edit: The article says "Google Cloud," which includes App Engine, Compute Engine, and Container Engine... so I guess without more clarification, it's hard to know what exactly is being compared.
- EpicEng 12y agoWell, i think the second sentence is the important bit. You probably know as well as I that products, especially in large companies, are not always chosen on technical merit alone. Hell, the director of IT at the company I currently work for just went with AWS, primarily because he sees them as the big player in the market. He's not overly technical, more of a buzzword regurgitator, but it's ultimately his call.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> All of us preferring to run real OSes rather than some awkward proprietary sandbox, it's all just our falling for "branding" huh? The first part of your sentence sounds like you are confusing the whole of Google Cloud -- which includes an IaaS that runs "real OS's" (Google Compute Engine) -- with one of the older components of Google Cloud, the PaaS (AppEngine) that might reasonably be described as something like a "proprietary sandbox". So, it seems like exactly the effect that was described with regard to perception and branding.
- seanp2k2 12y agoI would guess that this confusion is pretty common, too. Maybe it was a mistake to launch GAE before Compute. It'd be like AWS starting with Lambda for a few years, messing with pricing, then somewhat quietly launching a general-purpose compute PaaS. Also, AWS has dozens of services. Does Google have the same building blocks? (Storage, caching, CDN, databases, load balancing, etc)
- mathattack 12y agoThe dominance of Amazon continues to amaze me. I thought that Google would win since this is a technology fight. In 20/20 hindsight, it's a price war, and that's in the DNA of Amazon.
- Grazester 12y agoAmazon would not be able to survive a race to the bottom in a price war like Google can. Google makes a profit on its main business, Amazon does not.
- chubot 12y agoWell, Amazon also has a 6 year head start. Compute Engine has only been generally available since December 2013: http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/google-compute-engine-is-now-generally-available.html http://googlecloudplatform.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/google-com... App Engine was released a long time ago, around the same time as AWS, but they aren't comparable products. It seems clear that the market chose the AWS technology since it was more compatible with existing code.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> App Engine was released a long time ago, around the same time as AWS Two years later, actually.
- geobmx540 12y agoIt probably helps that AWS has some big and vocal clients. NFLX has probably helped AWS drive innovation and new tooling by providing use cases that most other platforms likely don't have. It also helps that NFLX is crazy vocal on the technical side about how they use AWS to it's fullest capabilities and how they build around "limitations". Makes others feel comfortable that the stack should be able to work for anyone. I'm an Azure client and prefer azure personally.
- wnevets 12y agoI'm a bit of a Google fanboy however at work I haven't seriously considered moving to their cloud offering.
- AndyNemmity 12y agoI work with CIOs of major companies often. The biggest driver here from what I see is that people are more familiar with AWS. All along the chain of decision making, people have experience with AWS, and can validate it for use. Not so for other cloud services. It becomes inevitable when every decision maker in your chain can validate one product, and has no experience with others.
- Someone1234 12y agoThat rings true for me. AWS has a huge amount of momentum behind it because people are already familiar with the product, thanks in part to its market position, but also due to the 12 months free trial that a lot of people [ab]use in their own time. I will say Microsoft has been doing a lot to familiarise people with Azure, they've been giving it away to students and MSDN subscriptions like candy as well as offering trials in various shapes and sizes. I dread to think how much Microsoft spends on Azure advertising, but considering there is now an NFL ad for it, likely a heck of a lot.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- newobj 12y agoIt doesn't say 2013, it says 2015. See the original here: https://piper2.bluematrix.com/sellside/EmailDocViewer?encrypt=7856c68e-3f1a-4ce9-a7e7-99fe25145cd9&mime=pdf&co=Piper&id=jyarow@businessinsider.com&source=mail https://piper2.bluematrix.com/sellside/EmailDocViewer?encryp...
- geobmx540 12y ago2014 and 2015 I think?
- bpodgursky 12y agoAs they say... nobody ever got fired for buying AWS.
- hadley 12y agoprop.test(c(13, 8), c(152, 152)): 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction data: c(13, 8) out of c(152, 152) X-squared = 0.8184, df = 1, p-value = 0.3656 alternative hypothesis: two.sided 95 percent confidence interval: -0.03057673 0.09636621 So there's no evidence that there actually was a statistically significant change in usage of google's cloud.
- b1twise 12y agoI moved my company over to AWS before all the other options popped up. I did have a few back and forth conversations with someone from GCE late last year, but the end of the year is not really a great time to start a move like that. We are forced to use some other Google products and the lack of support, number of new "features" that aren't thought through, and their lack of ability to give answers to BASIC and SIMPLE question drives me crazy. Sometimes it feels like they're out to specifically screw us. We've cut our adwords budget significantly. The only nagging thing that tugs at my brain is that maybe we'd be considered a 'fast' internet site and get better search engine ranking if we were on GCE. That might make it worth it.