Most small companies don't reserve for 3 years. The on-demand monthly cost is 388 (GCP) vs 562 (AWS) per instance for the instances in the report (omitting SSD costs).
AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
101–104 of 104 posts
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're confusing UX with UI. You can have an excellent UX that's still just a CLI.
Google uses "gsutil" and "gcloud" whereas AWS just uses "aws". Both are clear but because Google arbitrarily has 2 tools I constantly have to remember which one had which feature. It's not a big thing but little stuff like makes it more cumbersome to use.
There's also bq for BigQuery stuff.
If they did merge... it would be "gcloud bq..." or "gcloud storage...", my fingers protest :)
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#103Most small companies don't reserve for 3 years. The on-demand monthly cost is 388 (GCP) vs 562 (AWS) per instance for the instances in the report (omitting SSD costs).
Furthermore, GCP encrypts its disks by default. So I'd expect a slight degradation of performance.
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#104Developer experience on GCP is vastly superior to AWS. - Pricing on GCP is much easier, no need to purchase reserved instances, figure out all the details and buried AWS billing rules. Run your GCP instances and automatically get discounts. AWS reserved instances requires knowing your instance types, knowing that you can purchase the smallest type of an instance class and combine, knowing that you can only purchase 2…
Yet more reasons my employer chose to partner with GCP instead of AWS
On the "enterprise" end of cloud computing, the only truly good options are GCP & Azure
AWS is very much the IBM of yesteryear - it's expensive, but "no one ever got fired for buying AWS" ... except AWS is about to have (even starting already) their own IBM moment - question is, will they fail to pivot the way IBM did?