Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 104 posts

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#71

Post by dustinmoris »

Personally my experience with the Google Cloud has been the best, but I think if one goes with AWS or GCP they'll be fine either way.

Just stay away from Azure. If death by a thousand needles was ever true then it must be for Azure. The hidden caveats, pain points, down times, subtle bugs, Portal issues, confusing documentation pages, and so on are a HUUUUUGE time sink. Honestly the cost of Azure is irrelevant when you spend 5x more expensive developer time in getting simple stuff working.

Don't say I haven't warned you...

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#73

Post by cocoland2 »

marceldegraaf wrote: post #63
ctchan wrote: post #24

After installing the GCP CLI tool, I keep having this nagging concern that it would be used to track me for advertising purposes.

There's a configuration option to disable that, as per Google's documentation: https://cloud.google.com/sdk/usage-statistics

Should be more opt in rather than opt out. I know some Azure libraries do something similar , but with google , i do not want advertisements on youtube about "demand of AI engineers and self driving cars" because i use gcloud CLI :)

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#75

Post by logicchains »

preommr wrote: post #12

Competition is always better and welcomed. But I really don't understand what edge google offers other products. If anything, I am always really wary about google and their products. People might say that enterprise services are different, and it's different from free services where if you're not paying you can't expect anything, but there's been paid services by google that have been absolutely terrible like stadia.…

>But I really don't understand what edge google offers other products

Google Bigquery is head and shoulders above the competition, a really impressive work of engineering. It moreover sidesteps Google's poor API design culture by using SQL instead of something home-grown.

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#76

Post by orf »

koblas wrote: post #69
sneak wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like that's a Netlify competitor for building and hosting purely static sites.

It does a lot more than that. You can quickly add lambda functions. https://docs.amplify.aws/cli/function

Same with Netlify

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#77

Post by orf »

bushbaba wrote: post #25
richards wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keeping scrolling! Under GKE (managed Kubernetes), you see the call outs to EKS and AKS, respectively. The Anthos point is that other clouds don't offer their k8s stacks as supported options on other clouds. If you see things you find wrong in the table, let me know. Disclaimer: I work in product management at Google Cloud

> other clouds don't offer their k8s stacks as supported options on other clouds. AWS does have these offerings. https://aws.amazon.com/eks/eks-anywhere/ https://aws.amazon.com/eks/eks-distro/

EKS anywhere looks different to the GKE offering - seems focused on on-premise?

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#78

Post by sofixa »

FridgeSeal wrote: post #60
pkulak wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stadia is the best streaming game service there is. People just don't want that product.

It’s not significantly better than something like rain way, which at least has the courtesy to plug in to your pre-existing games library.

And, if i'm reading their site correctly, requires you to have a gaming PC with good networking. It's not even in the same ballpark as Stadia!

What you should be comparing Stadia to is GeForce Now, Amazon Luna, Shadow, which provide the computing power as a service. Stadia eschews Windows to run the games, making it cheaper ( their free tier gives you 1080p/60fps for free, you just have to buy the games on the Stadia Store) but limits what games they can run ( they have to be made for Vulkan). The downside is that you have to buy the games for it, but it supports ubisoft+ ( with an addon on the Ubisoft side). But you don't complain when you have to buy games anew when you buy a new platform ( be it a PS, Xbox or PC), and the same logic applies here.

GeForce Now and Amazon Luna are still a Windows server box behind the scenes, with the associated slowness and a bit clunky integrations ( e.g. GeForce Now requires you to re-login to Uplay or Epic or Steam every so often, which is painful with a random password and MFA, and no copy-paste available).

Shadow provide you full access to a Windows box, with the associated issues ( game updates and downloads are up to you, disk space is limited, etc.).

Stadia has some downsides, but IMHO fares very decently against the competition. I have both it and GeForce Now, for different games, and IMHO Stadia's UX is slightly better.

Re: Compare AWS and Azure Services to Google Cloud

#79

Post by anang »

Azure has absolutely the worst interface in my opinion, but I’ve found that for a lot of my clients them already having an azure account (via AD) outweighs pretty much anything else.

I think Microsoft know this and know they come a long way without having to compete.

Post reply on HN