AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the platform-as-a-service offering provided by Amazon and designed to leverage AWS services such as Amazon Elastic Cloud Compute (Amazon EC2), Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3).
$35
per month
Genesys Cloud CX
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Genesys Cloud CX (formerly PureCloud, Genesys Cloud) is a contact center application optimized for automatic call distribution, interactive voice response, email, social media, chat, and text/SMS. It is also a VoIP interconnect service provider.
$75
per month (billed annually) per user
Google App Engine
Score 8.2 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
AWS Elastic Beanstalk
Genesys Cloud CX
Google App Engine
Editions & Modules
No Charge
$0
Users pay for AWS resources (e.g. EC2, S3 buckets, etc.) used to store and run the application.
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is equivalent to Google App Engine in terms of product. I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk because it was within the stack we were using, and it made sense for us given the other architecture.
I selected AWS Elastic Beanstalk mainly because we have been using AWS services for our company. Using AWS Elastic Beanstalk is relatively easier than starting to use a completely new cloud platform. But we are also reviewing Google App Engine, and found out Elastic Beanstalk …
In some of the other companies that I've worked in, I've had the opportunity to work with the above softwares where the structure and architecture of the services was much complicated but the above softwares were able to handle it with more ease and efficiency. The complex …
There are many services like AWS Elastic beanstalk, but there are none with the maturity in the platform or the cost-effectiveness of AWS Elastic Beanstalk. Also, AWS Elastic Beanstalk is the oldest among them, so there are more people with AWS experience than the other …
I have used App Engine on Google Cloud Platform and App Service on Microsoft Azure. Both offer similar capabilities to AWS Elastic Beanstalk. App Engine has the nice ability to scale to 0 instances when the application has not been in use for some time. This allows for …
AWS Elastic Beanstalk is a great option for an organization that's already invested in the AWS ecosystem. The greater the number of complementary features needed by the application (e.g. integrating with Amazon's Elastic Load Balancer, databases, etc), the greater the reward …
simpler and cheaper sums up the benefits. AWS became too bureaucratic while Google App Engine made he process easier to setup. Again, I just spent a few minutes to setup a simple app, setup a budget, add my credit card and have it up and running. Google is captivating its user …
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 …
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 …
I have been using AWS Elastic Beanstalk for more than 5 years, and it has made our life so easy and hassle-free. Here are some scenarios where it excels -
I have been using different AWS services like EC2, S3, Cloudfront, Serverless, etc. And Elastic Beanstalk makes our lives easier by tieing each service together and making the deployment a smooth process.
N number of integrations with different CI/CD pipelines make this most engineer's favourite service.
Scalability & Security comes with the service, which makes it the absolute perfect product for your business.
Personally, I haven't found any situations where it's not appropriate for the use cases it can be used. The pricing is also very cost-effective.
I liked the agent and skill based routing. As a business who have multiple brands and accounts, we usually have agents that are specific to certain brand with different priorities. So this feature has been specifically helpful to our business when routing them through phone, email and chat supports. It helps us generate high customer satisfaction ratings across channels
App Engine is such a good resource for our team both internally and externally. You have complete control over your app, how it runs, when it runs, and more while Google handles the back-end, scaling, orchestration, and so on. If you are serving a tool, system, or web page, it's perfect. If you are serving something back-end, like an automation or ETL workflow, you should be a little considerate or careful with how you are structuring that job. For instance, the Standard environment in Google App Engine will present you with a resource limit for your server calls. If your operations are known to take longer than, say, 10 minutes or so, you may be better off moving to the Flexible environment (which may be a little more expensive but certainly a little more powerful and a little less limited) or even moving that workflow to something like Google Compute Engine or another managed service.
Getting a project set up using the console or CLI is easy compared to other [computing] platforms.
AWS Elastic Beanstalk supports a variety of programming languages so teams can experiment with different frameworks but still use the same compute platform for rapid prototyping.
Common application architectures can be referenced as patterns during project [setup].
Multiple environments can be deployed for an application giving more flexibility for experimentation.
Limited to the frameworks and configurations that AWS supports. There is no native way to use Elastic Beanstalk to deploy a Go application behind Nginx, for example.
It's not always clear what's changed on an underlying system when AWS updates an EB stack; the new version is announced, but AWS does not say what specifically changed in the underlying configuration. This can have unintended consequences and result in additional work in order to figure out what changes were made.
There is a slight learning curve to getting used to code on Google App Engine.
Google Cloud Datastore is Google's NoSQL database in the cloud that your applications can use. NoSQL databases, by design, cannot give handle complex queries on the data. This means that sometimes you need to think carefully about your data structures - so that you can get the results you need in your code.
Setting up billing is a little annoying. It does not seem to save billing information to your account so you can re-use the same information across different Cloud projects. Each project requires you to re-enter all your billing information (if required)
As our technology grows, it makes more sense to individually provision each server rather than have it done via beanstalk. There are several reasons to do so, which I cannot explain without further diving into the architecture itself, but I can tell you this. With automation, you also loose the flexibility to morph the system for your specific needs. So if you expect that in future you need more customization to your deployment process, then there is a good chance that you might try to do things individually rather than use an automation like beanstalk.
The upcoming upgrades working with Genesys Cloud and Salesforce are very exciting. Even though we don't use Genesys Cloud to the fullest extent it can be used (we just migrated a year ago), when these upgrades roll out, I am very excited to see what it can do to for our agents. I think they are going to be very impressed
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.
The overall usability is good enough, as far as the scaling, interactive UI and logging system is concerned, could do a lot better when it comes to the efficiency, in case of complicated node logics and complicated node architectures. It can have better software compatibility and can try to support collaboration with more softwares
Everything is very good. It is very useful, friendly to users and it makes our work easier than what we expected. I think that I don't need any help from someone on how to use Genesys coz basically they will directly feed it to you without any hassle on using it.
I had to revisit the UI after a year of just setting up and forgetting. The UI got some improvements but the amount of navigation we have to go through to setup a new app has increased but also got easier to setup. Gemini now is integrated and make getting answers faster
The platform is highly reliable, with minimal downtime or outages, and is generally available when needed. Over the course of using it, unplanned outages or application errors have been rare, and any issues that did arise were quickly resolved. Genesys provides robust support and maintenance, ensuring the system remains operational during critical business hours. However, like any cloud-based platform, there have been occasional disruptions, though these were infrequent and quickly addressed. Overall, its availability has been excellent, supporting smooth daily operations.
Overall, the platform performs well, with pages loading quickly and reports typically completing in a reasonable time, even with complex data. The interface is responsive, and most day-to-day tasks are executed efficiently. However, in some instances, especially during peak usage times or when running very detailed, large-scale reports, there can be slight delays. While these are rare, they occasionally affect workflow. Additionally, the platform generally integrates smoothly with other systems, though some integrations can slow down slightly, particularly when pulling large datasets or interacting with older, legacy systems. Nonetheless, the performance is strong and reliable for most use cases.
As I described earlier it has been really cost effective and really easy for fellow developers who don't want to waste weeks and weeks into learning and manually deploying stuff which basically takes month to create and go live with the Minimal viable product (MVP). With AWS Beanstalk within a week a developer can go live with the Minimal viable product easily.
Support does indeed resolve the issue but they seem to be really slow and I have to stay on them to get my ticket handled. Everyone I have interacted with is very professional and pleasant. Other than being slow its been a good experience
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.
Genesys team that provide trainings are friendly and professional. They helped us to understand well the product and the functionalities. The training was detailed with use cases. At the end, we got a task to develop that ended with success and we got some Genesys rewards. It was amazing experience
In general, it gives a description and can help to understand what to do and how. but: Sometimes, it does not keep up with changes in the system (for example, in the GUI changes, additional features and so on). Sometimes, much easier and helpful to read the documentation (https://help.mypurecloud.com/) that gives the "better" explanations and takes less time.
- Do as many experiments as you can before you commit on using beanstalk or other AWS features. - Keep future state in mind. Think through what comes next, and if that is technically possible to do so. - Always factor in cost in terms of scaling. - We learned a valuable lesson when we wanted to go multi-region, because then we realized many things needs to change in code. So if you plan on using this a lot, factor multiple regions.
The first engineer that we had work with our team was not able to grasp our needs. However, Genesys Cloud CX quickly replaced that person with an overqualified engineer who joined our implementation team because he wanted to support our work.
We also use Heroku and it is a great platform for smaller projects and light Node.js services, but we have found that in terms of cost, the Elastic Beanstalk option is more affordable for the projects that we undertake. The fact that it sits inside of the greater AWS Cloud offering also compels us to use it, since integration is simpler. We have also evaluated Microsoft Azure and gave up trying to get an extremely basic implementation up and running after a few days of struggling with its mediocre user interface and constant issues with documentation being outdated. The authentication model is also badly broken and trying to manage resources is a pain. One cannot compare Azure with anything that Amazon has created in the cloud space since Azure really isn't a mature platform and we are always left wanting when we have to interface with it.
I don't think it can even compare. Genesys Cloud CX is a whole different level. The biggest advantage was that Genesys cares about its customers, regardless of size; it listens to feedback, encourages customers to get involved with its roadmap, and provides so many educational resources to ensure you are well set for success after the implementation.
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 compared to the other major players in Azure and AWS.
Genesys provides Licensing in 3 tier subscription types of licenses on top based on any business requirements then any sort of feature/functionality inclusion (or removal) is discussed openly. There are 2 types of billing models available which are "Named" and "Concurrent" based on the type of roles users will perform in Genesys Cloud CX environment (eg. Agent, Supervisor, Administrator, and Business Users) Also, the billing period/frequency starts on the actual day the platform is delivered.
I give Genesys a rating of 10 for scalability because of its ability to adapt seamlessly to growing business needs, whether expanding across multiple departments, locations, or regions. Its cloud-based infrastructure allows for easy scaling without the need for costly hardware upgrades or lengthy implementation times. As our organisation grew, we were able to add new agents, channels, and features without disrupting operations, which significantly enhanced our flexibility. The platform's design supports both small-scale and enterprise-level operations, making it ideal for evolving businesses. Additionally, its capacity to handle increased interaction volumes without compromising performance ensures that customer service quality remains high, even during peak times. This flexibility and ease of scaling, combined with real-time analytics and automation capabilities, make it highly effective for growing organisations.
Professional services are definitely much more experienced than the support teams, and the price for their services is very fair. I wish that the support team could help answer simple questions about work that the PSS team does, however, so that we do not have to use our SOW for simple Q&A emails.
For a product-based company like ours, we have existing Genesys customers who can use our product, as we have already integrated our product & solution into Genesys.
By viewing Genesys as a contact center, we generate numerous ideas about what features need to be implemented.
Genesys is the best choice for big, enterprise-level businesses as it can handle multiple calls simultaneously seamlessly.
Effective integration to other java based frameworks.
Time to market is very quick. Build, test, deploy and use.
The GAE Whitelist for java is an important resource to know what works and what does not. So use it. It would also be nice for Google to expand on items that are allowed on GAE platform.
