Azure VMware Solution vs. Google App Engine

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure VMware Solution
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Azure VMware Solution enables users to run VMware workloads natively on Azure. The user can move VMware-based workloads from the datacenter to Azure and integrate a VMware environment with Azure. This enables users to continue managing existing environments with the same VMware tools already in use while including Azure native services. Azure VMware Solution is a Microsoft service, verified by VMware, that runs on Azure infrastructure.N/A
Google App Engine
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Google App Engine is Google Cloud's platform-as-a-service offering. It features pay-per-use pricing and support for a broad array of programming languages.
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Pricing
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Starting Price
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Max Price
$0.30
Per Hour Per Instance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Considered Both Products
Azure VMware Solution
Chose Azure VMware Solution
It's very good compared to its competitors as great uptime, easy support and interactive User Interface makes it a wonderful solution.
Google App Engine
Chose Google App Engine
For our organization, we selected Google App Engine which provides a reliable and efficient way to create and deploy apps moreover it supports a lot of languages and provides automatic debugging of code which enables us to deploy code to production as soon as development is …
Chose Google App Engine
If you have a small team which is also responsible for development of the product then surely go for it. And if you have a larger team with dedicated person to take care of deployments. Go for cheaper options such as compute engine or AWS (be sure to do your research on pricing …
Chose Google App Engine
We prefer Google App Engine over Linode when need to hosting applications for R&D and Testing. Since the deployment has much less configuration.
Chose Google App Engine
It's the manageability of the Google App Engine which made it a better option in our case.
It's quite straightforward to deploy on App-Engine.
No worries for monitoring setup
Chose Google App Engine
You can create and scale Kubernetes clusters quickly, but you have to keep an eye on that cluster. In-App Engine, you don't have to worry about infrastructure, but in some scenarios, Kubernetes fits better.
Chose Google App Engine
Google App Engine is the first product we picked up to store the mass data. Later we came to know that, firebase database is also similar to Google App Engine. But still, we didn't step into it. We will try it later.
Chose Google App Engine
Azure App Service is in par with Google App Engine although you may want to use Azure App Service if you are integrating with other Microsoft IT components, for example SQL Server. Google App Engine is great when in long run, you will be using Google cloud components, for …
Chose Google App Engine
App Engine is a much more streamlined system than EC2. There is a fundamental difference between them, but they are used for basically the same thing as far a I could tell -- to serve applications EC2 is certainly more complicated, but if offers more machine-level control if …
Chose Google App Engine
Google App Engine is very easy to use and mostly up to date makes it compatible with all old and new devices. The applications are very interactive and the prices are accessible for most users. The prices tend to get slightly expensive as we head on towards higher …
Chose Google App Engine
The two giants are Google and Amazon. Both are very similar however Google App Engine allows you to deploy your web applications through platforms like Python where as if you're using AWS, you have full control on the operating system services. Google is good because you pay as …
Chose Google App Engine
We were on another much smaller cloud provider and decided to make the switch for several reasons - stability, breadth of services, and security. In reviewing options, GCP provided the best mixtures of meeting our needs while also balancing the overall cost of the service as …
Chose Google App Engine
We commonly decide between App Service, Elastic Beanstalk, and App Engine. Normally, we do not have a strong preference for the services, it really comes down to whether or not there are other factors drawing us toward a particular platform. In the case of App Engine, it is a …
Chose Google App Engine
I think that Microsoft and Amazon are simply investing more in their offerings, and there are a bunch of cool PaaS solutions out there as well. Google App Engine is solid, and is probably the right choice for some projects. But ultimately one should evaluate each platform …
Chose Google App Engine
Azure - too Windows. Do not want IIS or Windows OS. AWS - too much configuration for the tasks at hand.
Chose Google App Engine
Google Apps is great for environments where the need for a more robust platform is not necessary if you are looking to have email and cloud collaboration enablement of your working staff. From the stand point of using both, I can see the value of both but it really depends on …
Chose Google App Engine
AWS and Heroku are both great, and I use them both extensively for different projects. Google App Engine was chosen because it is much more innovative than AWS, and because Heroku specializes in Ruby on Rails. Even though Heroku supports Java and other services, we feel Google …
Chose Google App Engine
With GAE it's a matter of "code your app and deploy it". You don't care on what servers or on how many servers it runs. System administration is done for you. With AWS you still have to be a system administrator with good knowledge and undestanding of load balancers, database …
Chose Google App Engine
You can spawn up your own cluster using Kubernetes or Container Engine which will scale automatically when configured properly, but you have to keep an eye on that cluster. In App Engine you don't have to worry about it at all, just ship your code and it will run.
Chose Google App Engine
We chose Google App Engine because it supplies the most infrastructure per dollar spent. It's much more expensive to use Amazon EC2 to scale to over a million users. Also, the engine's narrow language support system, while somewhat limiting, makes getting started quickly much …
Chose Google App Engine
Heroku allows for more flexibility, but GAE gives you more APIs and features by default, whereas Heroku might require you to implement them yourself.
Chose Google App Engine
  • No management of operating system
  • Cheaper
Chose Google App Engine
We left Lotus Notes for the (more versatile) Google Apps. We could never recommend the closed architecture of Lotus Notes. We have evaluated Office 365 and believe the product is compelling. So compelling, that we may consider a platform change…
Chose Google App Engine
Google App Engine stands out since it offers everything as being a platform as a service. The other options I used before, such as classical development with servers available either in house or in the cloud still require a lot of management and the software frameworks …
Features
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS)
Comparison of Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) features of Product A and Product B
Azure VMware Solution
8.6
Ratings
7% above category average
Google App Engine
-
Ratings
Service-level Agreement (SLA) uptime9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Dynamic scaling8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Monitoring tools9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Pre-defined machine images9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Operating system support10.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Security controls7.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Automation8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure VMware Solution
-
Ratings
Google App Engine
8.7
Ratings
9% above category average
Ease of building user interfaces00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Scalability00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Platform management overhead00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Platform access control00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Development environment creation00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Development environment replication00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Issue recovery00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Small Businesses
DigitalOcean Droplets
DigitalOcean Droplets
Score 8.7 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
SAP on IBM Cloud
SAP on IBM Cloud
Score 9.5 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.7
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.4
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure VMware SolutionGoogle App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
Cloud-Native Applications: If you are building cloud-native applications that are designed to run on Azure, AVS may not be the best solution. In this case, you should consider using Azure-native services, such as Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) or Azure Functions.Minimal Workloads: If you have a small number of workloads, it may not be cost-effective to use AVS. In this case, you can consider using Azure Virtual Machines (VMs) or other Azure services that are better suited for small workloads.Custom Hardware Configurations: If you require custom hardware configurations or specialized hardware, AVS may not be able to meet your requirements. In this case, you can consider using other Azure services, such as Azure Dedicated Hosts, that offer more flexibility in terms of hardware configurations.Cost-Sensitive Workloads: If you have cost-sensitive workloads, AVS may not be the best solution. While AVS offers many benefits, it can also be more expensive than other Azure services. In this case, you should consider using Azure services that are more cost-effective, such as Azure Virtual Machines.
Read full review
Google App Engine is especially well suited for situations where there is a variable workload during the day, e.g. inbound task processing with task queues. In this situation queues can be setup with parameters governing the process speed/scaling which allows you to easily balance performance with cost and meet a good balance.
Read full review
Pros
  • Create and Manage Virtual Machines
  • Multiple OS base Virtual Machines
  • Good Capacity Planning and Management
Read full review
  • Building an application that uses Google's Authentication, means users no longer need to remember an different user id and password. Once they are logged into to Google, they can seamlessly access your application hosted on Google App Engine.
  • Google App Engine automatically scales up and down. SO if your application receives a spike in user traffic, App Engine automatically launches additional instances of your application to cater for the increased traffic. Once App Engine detects that the spike is usage is over, it automatically scales down to handle the current traffic.
  • Google App Engine can be easily integrated with Google Cloud SQL, Google Compute Engine, Google Cloud Storage etc, so that you can build out a full application using one or more of Google's Cloud Platform products.
Read full review
Cons
  • Easier access to features and editing your own dashboard
Read full review
  • For beginners, there is a learning curve that can be reduced by decluttering the functionalities.
  • For much big migrations it takes to a lot of time to deploy which can be reduced.
  • The scaling of applications based on the user count is not seamless and it requires improvement.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
App Engine is a solid choice for deployments to Google Cloud Platform that do not want to move entirely to a Kubernetes-based container architecture using a different Google product. For rapid prototyping of new applications and fairly straightforward web application deployments, we'll continue to leverage the capabilities that App Engine affords us.
Read full review
Usability
Very good usable solution.
Read full review
Google App Engine is very intuitive. It has the common programming language most would use. Google is a dependable name and I have not had issues with their servers being down....ever. You can safely use their service and store your data on their servers without worrying about downtime or loss of data.
Read full review
Support Rating
No answers on this topic
Good amount of documentation available for Google App Engine and in general there is large developer community around Google App Engine and other products it interacts with. Lastly, Google support is great in general. No issues so far with them.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
It's very good compared to its competitors as great uptime, easy support and interactive User Interface makes it a wonderful solution.
Read full review
App Engine is a much more streamlined system than EC2. There is a fundamental difference between them, but they are used for basically the same thing as far a I could tell -- to serve applications EC2 is certainly more complicated, but if offers more machine-level control if that's what you need. It can tend to cost more as well. App Engine is far more straightforward but there are limitations if you need to change the environment. But even then, Google Compute Engine also compares to EC2 and stays within GCP.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Cost Savings: One of the key benefits of AVS is that it can help businesses save money by reducing the costs associated with maintaining and upgrading on-premises infrastructure.
  • AVS can help businesses improve their agility by enabling them to quickly provision and scale VMware workloads in Azure.
Read full review
  • App Engine can scale basically infinitely so our users can always expect fast responsiveness.
  • App Engine has saved us money by only using the resources we need when we need them.
  • The security and IAM policies surrounding App Engine have saved a lot of head aches.
Read full review
ScreenShots