Google App Engine vs. Platform.sh

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Platform.sh
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Platform.sh helps companies of all sizes, from SaaS entrepreneurs looking to build, run, and scale their websites and web applications.N/A
Pricing
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Editions & Modules
Starting Price
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Max Price
$0.30
Per Hour Per Instance
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Features
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Google App Engine
8.7
Ratings
9% above category average
Platform.sh
9.3
Ratings
15% above category average
Ease of building user interfaces9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability9.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Platform management overhead9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration8.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Development environment creation9.00 Ratings10.00 Ratings
Development environment replication8.00 Ratings10.00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification9.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Issue recovery9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes8.00 Ratings9.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 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
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
7.7
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Google App EnginePlatform.sh
Likelihood to Recommend
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
In our organisation we are the only team that uses Platform.sh to host any site. This was a cost effective way for us as we were using Acquia Cloud earlier for these websites. We mostly use Platform.sh for those sites which are always in development as it is simpler and faster to handle these operations in Platform.sh. Then we do a lift and shift to Acquia as we move more towards the go live and post production maintenance side.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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
  • As this is a PaaS it mitigates the complexities of a Cloud infrastructure like Acquia
  • We are easily able to integrate our sites with different technologies like Python and Rest
  • Helps us in providing Continuous Development cloud deployment hosting solution
Read full review
Cons
  • 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
  • Platform.sh is not for beginners in my opinion. It has a good amount of learning curve in my opinion.
  • As this is a PaaS, teams habituated with cloud infrastructure may miss the server side support from their cloud teams. I believe you will have to work on server bugs more on your own.
  • During normal maintenance periods, integrations may fail if you are working on your sites in that time, in my experience.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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
In our team we use Platform.sh mostly while sites are in developmental phase. Then we do a lift and shift to either Acquia or AWS depending on the type of sites we have. Platform.sh is really cost effective and more fluid in terms of Continuous Development hence the usage. After said development is done, we generally lift and shift to Acquia for more content heavy sites and to AWS for more transaction oriented sites.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • 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
  • Continuous development for sites in build has been fluid
  • Platform.sh is really cost effective when comparing to AWS or Acquia Cloud
  • On the other side, lack of server side support demands a big learning curve from its users in my opinion.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Platform.sh Screenshots

Screenshot of