Amazon S3 is a cloud-based object storage service from Amazon Web Services. It's key features are storage management and monitoring, access management and security, data querying, and data transfer.
N/A
Google Cloud Storage
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Storage is unified object storage for developers and enterprises.
N/A
Pricing
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Google Cloud Storage
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon S3
Google Cloud Storage
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Google Cloud Storage
Ask people about this product
Oswald Schmidt• 2nd
Legacy Response Consultant at Pagac - Flatley
Skilled at Licensed Concrete Soap
Haven Koelpin• 2nd
District Markets Director at Johns, Bruen and Haag
Skilled at Rustic Granite Tuna
Nash Pfannerstill• 2nd
Regional Implementation Planner at Langosh Inc
Skilled at Refined Metal Tuna
See helpful people who have experience with this product
In terms of AWS services, S3 is the best storage solution offered that gives us security and reliability with a wide, even if it is too wide at times, array of services making it a cost effective solution. However, when compared to other large cloud providers, such as Google & …
Overall, we found that Amazon S3 provided a lot of backend features Google Cloud Storage (GCS) simply couldn't compare to. GCS was way more expensive and really did not live up to it. In terms of setup, Google Cloud Storage may have Amazon S3 beat, however, as it is more of a …
Amazon S3 compared to all of these has the worst user interface. Drive and Dropbox as everyone knows is simpler and used for shared work files with a user-friendly interface. Google Cloud Storage and Amazon S3 are both in the same boat for large application files and great for …
Since we use other AWS products, and since AWS and S3 are more familiar to developers, it is easier for us to stick with Amazon S3 over a similar solution like Google Cloud Storage.
Google Cloud Storage provides many of the same features as Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service), but they differ quite a bit in the database integrations they provide. The main reason we had to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) is because our main infrastructure cloud …
When we were implementation the solution of our issue then we find Azure and Google Cloud Storage platforms but we were unable to find the proper documentation for the platform as compared to S3, So we moved to S3 and discarded the other options. Cost wise there are only some …
All other alternatives are also good but as our infrastructure was on AWS, Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) was a better choice due to its better integration with other AWS services. It was serving the purpose in an economical way. All of our needs were being fulfilled by …
We had already decided to use Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) for other compute services, so it made sense to use Amazon for blob storage as well. By using the same cloud vendor, we can more easily integrate between AWS services like Cloudfront. Blob storage is essentially a …
Amazon S3 comes with all other services of AWS, all other services are very quick and secure with S3 storage, which is the best option for any application. Again, compared to other services like Azure or GCP, AWS provides more configuration and functions to host multi nature …
There are alternatives, Google Cloud Storage and Azure storage are the only real rivals, in my opinion, although most hosting vendors have their own flavor of an S3 like utility. However, most of those are actually just sub-vendors of S3. The most compelling case for using …
Google Cloud Storage feels much more intuitive to use versus Amazon S3. I really prefer Google's Node SDK and web interface, and find Google Cloud Platform's access/identity management much more straightforward.
The two services are very comparable, but we have many different services that all run on the Google Cloud Platform and therefore Google Cloud Storage made more sense as our storage solution rather than looking to an outside service like S3. Either one of these options would …
Aside from Google Cloud Storage, we've used AWS S3 and have found the two comparable. In fact, GCS is one of a large number of object storage systems that are compatible with S3 (including DigitalOcean Spaces, IBM Cloud Storage, and Azure Blog Storage). When it comes to these …
We ended up with Google Cloud Storage most importantly because we found it far easier to set up, configure, and operate compared to Amazon's offerings. Amazon's many products make it difficult to find just the right one, and from there configuring is overly complicated. In …
If your budget is limited, or if you are just starting your business and you're looking for a cloud storage service, this is a good option which is reliable and cheap.
We tend to only select Google Cloud Storage when we're using other Google products as it makes integration easier -- but we tend not to choose it for situations where we can use a competing offering from Azure or AWS. We tend to implement the most Azure and AWS by far, and …
We selected GCS vs. others because we decided to use other Google Cloud services. Since we integrated GCS into our tools, we're still using GCS today, even though we've largely transitioned away from Google Compute services. GCS is still a very solid choice, even if your server …