Google offers the Firebase suite of application development tools, available free or at cost for higher degree of usages, priced flexibly accorded to features needed. The suite includes A/B testing and Crashlytics, Cloud Messaging (FCM) and in-app messaging, cloud storage and NoSQL storage (Cloud Firestore and Firestore Realtime Database), and other features supporting developers with flexible mobile application development.
$0.01
Per Verification
Google Authenticator
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Google Authenticator is a mobile authentication app.
Supabase seems to have the best of all worlds right now. Followed by MongoDB/Firebase for smaller projects requiring less manpower and resources. Azure and Microsoft are reserved for existing projects and larger corporate clients.
Although there are other backend platforms that could have provided us with a solution to our project. The way of grouping the solution in FIREBASE, atomizing in the same project the database, cloud functions, authentication, push notifications, etc., has given us a clearer …
Unlike other tools in the GCP suite that have an equivalent in other clouds such as Bigquery (Athenas on AWS), AI Platform (Sagemaker), Storage (S3), we do not find an equivalent as complete as Firebase in any other provider. This is the main reason why we chose this provider …
Firebase came to a multiuse case for our product for authenticating backend services, users on the app & get data on the user base using the dashboard.
Firebase has a single NoSQL database, it is a simple, powerful and uniform application development platform in connectors, it has multiple programming languages such as JavaScript and necessary tools that will simplify the creation of applications.
Firebase poses great documentation and integration with Android devices. And it's very good as well for iOS ones. So, for these scenarios, Firebase becomes the ideal ally.
It eases the app development process, has an extensive database that allows you to store media files in the cloud, supports robust uploads and downloads, and login authentication on any platform.
Firebase is easy to manage and scale really well for web application services. It offers better authentication and is easy to implement. For real-time analytics on web applications, it works very well. Firebase offers more features compared to other services especially it can …
Firebase is a much more comprehensive tool. While Fabric only had user traffic and trends data, it did not have the user communication set of tools. While CleverTap has CRM tools, it does not have tools for developers and product teams. While Adobe Analytics is good with …
I haven't played much with Heroku beyond deploying projects from Github. It looks to be very similar in providing a cloud-based platform for developing and deploying web apps as quickly as possible. I would look at comparing both of these before choosing a solution. I am just …
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted …
Firebase does a lot of things well, but Branch.io does a lot of things great. We originally chose Firebase because it was free, had great crash reporting, and full event tracking. As we began to scale, increase paid marketing spend, and implement features such as journey …
It's tough to pick out competitors against Firebase as I'm really unsure and doubt there's another product exactly like it. As mentioned before Firebase literally does everything you can imagine for a mobile application but doesn't get insanely deep in one feature or action. It …
Firebase is well suited for projects with simpler database workloads that require its real-time features. For data that is heavily read in real time, it's a great choice and gives developers a lot of features that would have been complicated and time-consuming to build up front …
Salesforce Field Service, LinkedIn Jobs, LinkedIn Marketing Solutions, Microsoft 365, Microsoft Powerpoint, Microsoft Excel, AutoCAD, Instagram for Business, LinkedIn Sales Navigator and LinkedIn Premium Business
There are a few things to keep in mind when using Google Authenticator. Second, it's imperative that everything be kept as simple as possible. Many customers don't understand why they're putting up MFA, therefore adding further difficulty to their daily routines is always a …
Being under the google umbrella gives a level of reassurance to our users. It seems to be cleaner and easier to use for our users. Being able to use a product from an already known vendor helps onboard new users to the software. It is clean and easy to use, all of the users …
First, Google Authenticator meets the security requirements which should be considered "table stakes". Second, simplicity is critical. Many users don' understand why they are setting up MFA (or they just don't care), and so adding additional complications to their day-to-day is …
Setup was easier and transferring between accounts is simpler in Google Authenticator when compared against Symantec VIP. The other features kind of are the same where both provide keys in offline mode and work seamlessly. Keys are refreshed every 30 seconds in both the …
For myself and my business, we have not explored any other Authenticator out there. We have had no real issues with Google Authenticator and have no plans to switch.
We were using Duo before in our environment for two-factor environment. But when it comes to availability we were always facing issues such as time-sync & app integration. After using Google Authenticator it resolved our synchronization issues as well as the third-party tool …
Google Authenticator is cost-effective & a bucket of features as compared to other available solutions in the market. Google Authenticator provides a multi-layer of security with ease of integration features.
I used Cisco Secure Access Duo in my organization but I was not happy with [the] services. It creates lots of problems so I switched to google authenticator and it is really good. I am very happy with this software. No need to search [for] another option.
Google authenticator can only run on mobile devices, which makes for a more secure authentication flow. 1Password's desktop multi-factor authentication is easier to use, but it's the same device so is a weaker form of multi-factor authentication and thus less secure.
Google Authenticator is awesome. We used LastPass in the past. In general, I don't like password saving or authenticating services because it feels like a vault that I am putting all my trust in. With Google, they have made it so easy and secure, I feel confident. I have …
Google Authenticator is only really competing against SMS two-factor. Instead of getting a text from random phone numbers all the time, you go to one app/ website to get access to any account.
In addition, we can allow our members to share the same Google account (with a master …
We are using our WhatsApp Business Account to send OTP to our users, but we can't control our users for having a WhatsApp Account. And WhatsApp API is not free too and so complicated to implement. Google Authenticator is a good alternative and cost-free to our users for getting …
LastPass is the most similar to Authenticator that we're currently using, but I honestly wouldn't say they are all that similar. Authenticator is another step up, security-wise, from password managers as far as internet safety goes.
I tried a few other apps and decided to personally go with Authy, but I usually recommend Google Authenticator for most people who just want something simple and easy to use.
I also tried Microsoft Authenticator (not available in the list above), but it didn't work as well as …
Google Authenticator is a great alternative to FortiAuthenticator for our vendors to have us use to login securely to their secure portals and FTP sites. Google Authenticator does not require a setup by the Admin in order to use it. Google Authenticator does not require …
Twilio Authy is our preferred alternative - it features a lot of the same good features, along with a nicer backup setup and a more robust security model.
CyberDuo was also looked at - but because we were already set up with Google in our organization this seemed the way to go. Again, I am a user and have no authority in that area, but Google was seamless and transitioned us right into what was needed here.
Firebase should be your first choice if your platform is mobile first. Firebase's mobile platform support for client-side applications is second to none, and I cannot think of a comparable cross-platform toolkit. Firebase also integrates well with your server-side solution, meaning that you can plug Firebase into your existing app architecture with minimal effort.
Firebase lags behind on the desktop, however. Although macOS support is rapidly catching up, full Windows support is a glaring omission for most Firebase features. This means that if your platform targets Windows, you will need to implement the client functionality manually using Firebase's web APIs and wrappers, or look for another solution.
It is supported by virtually all cloud-based software applications for business. I am happy to allow users to use this in addition to other authenticators. Certainly, if your business is in the Google cloud it makes sense, but my approach to the remote/virtual work world these past couple of years has been structured flexibility. Leaving some choice up to the users for their own comfort, particularly when they are using their own devices. I cannot think of a scenario where it is less appropriate - perhaps where you run the risk of "app sprawl". I.e., where you are requiring users to handle multiple authenticators (which can happen with certain pieces of hardware) you may want to encourage consolidation into one to avoid frustration.
Extremely robust. Has about any tool you can think of under one roof making it extremely useful as a backup platform for data analytics or small teams that need something quickly.
Intuitive and easy UI/UX. Being made and owned by Google, you expect nothing less. Very easy to use for anyone that has any marketing or analytical experience especially in Google Analytics (which I just assume all marketers do).
Safe, secure, and sturdy. Never need to worry about downtimes or misinformation as it's as clean and safe as it is being run by Google.
FREE! What else is there to say. Unless you're an extremely large application handling hundreds of thousands to millions of users, this pay as you go plan will stay free.
Easy implementation: The product is very easy to implement both from embedding it into the application and from end users using it via their smartphones.
You can use Google Authenticator to manage multiple two-factor authentication keys.
Easy to add keys options: You can scan a QR code to set up 2FA in Google Authenticator. You can also do a manual entry using the unique key provided by the application you are setting up 2FA for.
Firebase/Firestore has very limited support for querying more complicated items; for example, performing a simple string search is not possible.
While upfront costs are low, costs can grow quickly if you're not careful about what you are being billed for.
Dashboards have at times shown different information to what is billed, and support from Google is less than stellar and not as effective as that from Amazon or Microsoft.
It runs on only a few platforms, specifically Android, iOS, and Blackberry and in my opinion it needs to be available on every platform that is out there.
SA drawback I have noticed is that if you swap phones you have to blitz the entire app and go back and sync up all the accounts again which can be very frustrating for new users.
It can also be risky ( for some ) having all all your data centralized in one place.
Firebase functions are more difficult to use, there are no concepts of triggers or cascading deletes without the use of Firebase functions. Firebase functions can run forever if not written correctly and cause billing nightmares. While this hasn't happened to us specifically it is a thing that happens more than one realizes.
It's as easy as opening the app and what I need it for is there. I don't have to fumble with other accounts or getting something else to open it for me. I have all the access that I need for the use of the app within seconds and I can get access to the info that I need.
Our analytics folks handled the majority of the communication when it came to customer service, but as far as I was aware, the support we got was pretty good. When we had an issue, we were able to reach out and get support in a timely fashion. Firebase was easy to reach and reasonably available to assist when needed.
I have found Google’s support to be hit or miss. There are times when they are very responsive, and I get my issue resolved quickly, and there are times where a response from them takes weeks. There is no in-between. But my support experience with this particular product is nonexistent because I have not had a problem with it yet. Hopefully, we do not have any problems with it either.
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted database. This simplicity has allowed us to try features that we might not have based on the amount of work they required in the past.
This product doesn't ensure single-use, real-time codes. This puts our data at risk and is not as secure as Google Authenticator. I anticipate using Google Authenticator as long as we continue to use the full Google Suite for business. It helps to streamline data and accounts.
Firebase has been able to help us understand reliably, the drop-off in our user flows with their funnel feature. This has made it easy for us to be able to pinpoint weaknesses in our funnel and test and optimize with data as the dependent variable.
From an economic standpoint, we don't pay for Firebase which is great, but as the saying goes "You get what you pay for" also holds true in this context. As we looked to grow and scale, we looked for a paid solution.
From a developer resource standpoint, Firebase has been extremely easy to integrate into our app. Whether it be the event tracking, dynamic links or crash reporting we have not had to waste too much developer time thanks to their well-organized developer docs.
I would say from my limited role in the programs deployed and just being a user, this has been a valuable tool so our ROI is high. We get security and can breathe knowing we have authentication for those who have to be on our network and we are able to protect our work.