Azure App Service vs. Google Cloud Run

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure App Service
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
The Microsoft Azure App Service is a PaaS that enables users to build, deploy, and scale web apps and APIs, a fully managed service with built-in infrastructure maintenance, security patching, and scaling. Includes Azure Web Apps, Azure Mobile Apps, Azure API Apps, allowing developers to use popular frameworks including .NET, .NET Core, Java, Node.js, Python, PHP, and Ruby.
$9.49
per month
Google Cloud Run
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Run enables users to build and deploy scalable containerized apps written in any language (including Go, Python, Java, Node.js, .NET, and Ruby) on a fully managed platform. Cloud Run can be paired with other container ecosystem tools, including Google's Cloud Build, Cloud Code, Artifact Registry, and Docker. And it features out-of-the-box integration with Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Cloud Trace, and Error Reporting to ensure the health of an application.N/A
Pricing
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Editions & Modules
Shared Environment for dev/test
$9.49
per month
Basic Dedicated environment for dev/test
$54.75
per month
Standard Run production workloads
$73
per month
Premium Enhanced performance and scale
$146
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsFree and Shared (preview) plans are ideal for testing applications in a managed Azure environment. Basic, Standard and Premium plans are for production workloads and run on dedicated Virtual Machine instances. Each instance can support multiple applications and domains.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Considered Both Products
Azure App Service
Chose Azure App Service
AppServices that's easier to manage than its competitors, specially if you have everything in Azure. But also that's the most expensive service when you escalate or start using it for massive data processing. It would be an excellent containers platform if were easier to deal …
Chose Azure App Service
Azure is some what easy to use and we can learn the azure platform easily. And mainly for students they are giving free credits. So by using the credits we can learn or deploy using that credit
Chose Azure App Service
In terms of deploying your apps, Azure App Service provides a solid foundation. You may use either the Azure command-line interface or the Web Portal to administer these apps. As a whole, I find You may easily deploy your apps to Azure App Service to be a really difficult …
Chose Azure App Service
We didn't use other App services because we use Azure as our cloud provider and our first experience was with Azure App Service
Chose Azure App Service
Azure has many data center, their services are more reliable. Azure has way more features than both linode and digitalocean. If someone wants a complete reliable service, he/she must go to Azure instead of linode and digitalocean because even though azure charges more, it is …
Chose Azure App Service
  1. We selected Azure over Linode because of the CI/CD integration with DevOps.
  2. Azure has integration with docker containers.
  3. Azure has intehration with Sprint Planning.
Chose Azure App Service
Azure App Service will give you a very solid and strong platform to deploy your applications. It gives you great interfaces to manage those applications either through a Web Portal or the Azure command-line interface. However, I consider Azure overall to be very complex and …
Google Cloud Run
Chose Google Cloud Run
Most of our existing serverless services are deployed on Google to it was a natural choice. With the new artifact registry, its very easy to deploy. With git flows, its now even easier to update the deployment just with a commit to the main branch. The initial trial period is …
Chose Google Cloud Run
The other two obvious cloud providers have direct alternatives: AWS Lambda and Azure Functions. Both were also evaluated briefly (only to validate that they exist); however, the organization had settled on shifting to Google for business reasons, and therefore, the comparison …
Chose Google Cloud Run
Google Cloud Run is integrated into GCP resources, admin, and billing. But it is not as easy to use as some other platforms like Heroku.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Flexibility of features snd customzing options tha optimized the large process and make it on the the go to reuse the same process in multiple deployments ot rollouts
Chose Google Cloud Run
Cloud Run is just so much easier and straightforward to work with than EC2 when it comes to getting a Docker image up and running and serving requests.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Clear separation between container and execution layer.
Chose Google Cloud Run
Usage is easy and also we have GCP as out cloud partner hence we made up our mind to go with Cloud Run and so far no issues things are going fine with it. and getting good features from Google in it.
Chose Google Cloud Run
DigitalOcean auto scale droplets is still in early stages and is not on par with Google Cloud Run.

It is easy to develop and test Google Cloud Run applications compared to other available alternatives.
Chose Google Cloud Run
For us, Google Cloud Run is a complement to Google Tag Manager to enable server-side data collection.
Chose Google Cloud Run
AWS Lambda supports code zip package, enabling lower cold start time. Also, AWS Lambda pricing is much simpler, easier to understand.

Chose Google Cloud Run
The Goolge docs for their products as well as the UI is a lot nicer than AWS or Azure and in general I found it much easy to work with. We selected Google mainly because of startup credits and the support offered but can confidently say we would choose them again without that …
Features
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
8.0
Ratings
0% above category average
Google Cloud Run
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead4.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability5.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery6.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes5.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
-
Ratings
Google Cloud Run
7.3
Ratings
6% below category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings6.40 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings2.70 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings7.60 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.7 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
7.9
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
6.4
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
Azure App Service is well suited in our case :
  • Our website is developed by our tech partner in a full Microsoft Azure cloud based environment.
  • We gave them specific access rights and the CI / CD integration helped a lot for updates and improvements deployment.
  • Most of the infra issues we had with our website weren't coming from App Service
Read full review
Microservices and RestFul API application as it is fast and reliant. Seamless integration with event triggers such as pubsub or event arc, so you can easily integrate that with usecases with file uploads, database changes, etc. Basically great with short-lived tasks, if however, you have long-running processses, Cloud Run might not be idle for this. For example if you have a long running data processing task, other solutions such as kubeflow pipelines or dataflow are more suited for this kind of tasks. Cloud Run is also stateless, so if you need memory, you will have to connect an external database.
Read full review
Pros
  • Super quick & easy to deploy new apps in visual studio
  • Easy scaling to help reduce costs during off-hours
  • The powerful Azure ecosystem offers a lot of functionality that ties in well with Azure App Service
Read full review
  • Real-time autoscaling. Escalamento automático em tempo real
  • Simplified Continuous Deployment. Implantação contínua simplificada
  • Running tasks in the background. Execução de tarefas em segundo plano
Read full review
Cons
  • Abstraction of computing resources like Heroku does with dynos.
  • Azure Portal overall is pretty bloated and that affects managing Azure App Service applications.
Read full review
  • Cloud Run doesn't allow you to redeploy an already existing revision which can be inconvenient in some use cases
  • Tricky to get the deployment working to start but once it's working that's great
  • The actual deployment is not the fastest but it's not too bad
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
We definitely need to renew it because we dont own our own infrastructure and storage and we are happy with Cloud Run features
Read full review
Usability
I enjoy the fact that Azure App Service can be managed by the Azure portal and a fully graphical user interface, as well as from two different flavors of command-line interface, i.e. Azure CLI and Azure Powershell. By utilizing the Azure Cloud Shell, we are able to switch between Azure Bash (CLI) and Powershell at any given moment and manage the Azure App Service settings from devices of any form-factor (Web based management).
Read full review
The UI/console is great... the documentation is top-notch for developers, but the CLI itself when you have to script around it is very complex and easy to forget some options... the downside of a generic command line client.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
No answers on this topic
Not seen any major issues when we run applications its good
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Initially we felt slow but slowly it picked up and easy to manage
Read full review
Support Rating
We had an issue where we deployed too large of a resource and didn't notice until the bill came through. They were very understanding and saw we weren't utilizing the resources so they issued a generous refund in about 4 hours. Very fast, friendly, and understanding support reps from my experience.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I was involved in the initial implementation setup, Its easy with the given documentaiton we can do ourself. Not that critical
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
In terms of deploying your apps, Azure App Service provides a solid foundation. You may use either the Azure command-line interface or the Web Portal to administer these apps. As a whole, I find You may easily deploy your apps to Azure App Service to be a really difficult platform for novices to get their feet wet. First and foremost, I'd look at Heroku's user interface and the way it abstracts compute units.
Read full review
AWS Lambda supports code zip package, enabling lower cold start time. Also, AWS Lambda pricing is much simpler, easier to understand.
Other than that, the 2 products are very similar, including the Docker image support: the image must be built based on proprietary base image.
Obviously, if your other services are running in GCP, then Google Cloud Run is your only choice for tight integration, & private networking.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
It has good auto scale feature and reliable also
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Download time is reduced because of auto scaling feature.
  • Insight tool helps in finding issues quickly.
  • CI/CD has helped in automation.
Read full review
  • It has saved us some costs since we now do not require a live server and have moved to a serverless workflow for these services
  • Breaking changes do not affect the entire application now that we have separated our concerns using a serverless service
  • Much easier to debug since we can now isolate our services and reduce the search space for finding/fixing bugs
Read full review
ScreenShots