Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

news.ycombinator.com

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#21

I'm certified architect in both AWS and GCP and I prefer AWS. But it's possible it's because I learned it first. GCP is easier to start with for me, but becomes annoying because it's missing things that I can do in aws. For example, cloud run can't run docker containers that doesn't listen to a port. Just run it once and shut down like Fargate does in AWS. They want people to use kubernetes which is more complex and…

> For example, cloud run can't run docker containers that doesn't listen to a port. Just run it once and shut down like Fargate does in AWS.

I believe the Cloud Run team is working on it and it is in a private beta.

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#22

I have used both. GCP is designed to cover all the edge conditions on security. AWS can do that but it is much easier to shoot yourself in the foot with AWS security. That is why you get all the stories about people leaving their S3 buckets open.

my experience is the opposite. there's a lot of really insecure defaults in gcp, some of which are really hard to override - gcp makes it easier when the default service account that every is ridiculously overpermissioned, and for the longest time you couldnt change the service account in cloudfunctions or app engine, i forget which.

The reason you hear about s3 buckets and not gcs buckets is because usage of s3 is way higher and way older.

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#24

I'd echo others and say this boils down to familiarity more than anything else. Identity and authentication is honestly the one area where the popular cloud platforms differ the most. I used to work for AWS and currently work for Azure, and the switch from IAM to AAD caused more cognitive dissonance than any other difference between the platforms' respective offerings.

Having worked with both and gotten used to the difference, is azure AD more complex than the solutions from the other vendors?

I would say yes, Azure AD is more complex, but in a good way.

AWS IAM is interesting in that IAM resources are provisioned within a subscription. You can use IAM as an identity solution, giving everyone a user account and password, but you don't have to. Internally at AWS, we never used IAM users, but instead had an enterprise AD deployment that we used to log in to our computers and internal systems. One of those internal systems kept a list of AWS subscriptions and IAM roles you had access to, and would trade your AD credentials for temporary AWS credentials scoped to a role. It was pretty slick, but it's not inherent to IAM, so you typically need a third party service to do this for you. (At the job I had in between AWS and Microsoft, we used CloudTamer, and before that, we just had to keep track of 20 different username/password pairs.)

AAD on the other hand is a full blown identity platform that incidentally can also be used to log in to Azure. That means it integrates nicely with on-prem AD deployments and, more importantly, lets users log in once and navigate the subscriptions to which their account has been granted access. So it's actually simpler to use if you just need to be able to log in to multiple subscriptions, but you can run into cases where you need to operate on AAD resources in ways that aren't supported through Azure APIs. This primarily comes up if you need to grant a non-Azure permission as part of an Azure deployment. E.g., if you want to give a managed identity permission to read AAD metadata like service principal IDs, you can't do it from within ARM.

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#25
In general, it seems like GCP has higher level abstractions but documentation isn't as good as AWS. AWS gives you fairly "primitive" infrastructure APIs whereas GCP gives you more high-level, abstracted APIs that do more under the hood.

Personally, I've found AWS SDKs to be easier to work with (especially auth), although I've used them more so there's probably some bias.

GCP relies heavily on Oauth but it can be a bit clunky for human access (basically requiring browser auth)

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having worked with both and gotten used to the difference, is azure AD more complex than the solutions from the other vendors?

I would say yes, Azure AD is more complex, but in a good way. AWS IAM is interesting in that IAM resources are provisioned within a subscription. You can use IAM as an identity solution, giving everyone a user account and password, but you don't have to. Internally at AWS, we never used IAM users, but instead had an enterprise AD deployment that we used to log in to our computers and internal systems. One of those in…

It seems like IAM users are really only useful for very small companies or for off-platform access. Anything more than a handful of users and it's probably best offloading your auth to some other federated platform

AD is extremely built out and well established so I guess no surprise Azure leans on it heavily. AD/Kerberos authentication is pretty slick, too

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#27

I'm certified architect in both AWS and GCP and I prefer AWS. But it's possible it's because I learned it first. GCP is easier to start with for me, but becomes annoying because it's missing things that I can do in aws. For example, cloud run can't run docker containers that doesn't listen to a port. Just run it once and shut down like Fargate does in AWS. They want people to use kubernetes which is more complex and…

Having used GKE and EKS, I will say GKE is much simpler. Kubernetes is a powerful platform but you're right--it does have a lot of complexity and overhead.

ECS and Fargate are pretty solid if you want to run fairly simple containers but it's still a bit annoying they don't have all the cross-service integrations that Lambda does (SNS/SQS invokation, Kafka, etc)

Re: Ask HN: Is GCP harder to use than AWS?

#28
As someone who works on an MLOps platform that allows you to use your own clusters, I have to check multiple cloud providers for testing.

GCP is wonderful compared to AWS. It took me a week to sign up for AWS, including writing an issue and a phone call. It took other colleagues some hacky ways to start to use it, even at the sign-up phase.

Doing something on GCP is pretty straightforward. Creating VMs, Kubernetes clusters, etc. I've had non technical people do it successfully on their own. Live. While observed and under pressure.

AWS? Good lord. That's what I will say about it as I'd rather say good things about a good service than bad things about another.

Post reply on HN