Azure App Service vs. Google Cloud Run

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure App Service
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
The Microsoft Azure App Service is a PaaS that enables users to build, deploy, and scale web apps and APIs, a fully managed service with built-in infrastructure maintenance, security patching, and scaling. Includes Azure Web Apps, Azure Mobile Apps, Azure API Apps, allowing developers to use popular frameworks including .NET, .NET Core, Java, Node.js, Python, PHP, and Ruby.
$9.49
per month
Google Cloud Run
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Google Cloud Run enables users to build and deploy scalable containerized apps written in any language (including Go, Python, Java, Node.js, .NET, and Ruby) on a fully managed platform. Cloud Run can be paired with other container ecosystem tools, including Google's Cloud Build, Cloud Code, Artifact Registry, and Docker. And it features out-of-the-box integration with Cloud Monitoring, Cloud Logging, Cloud Trace, and Error Reporting to ensure the health of an application.N/A
Pricing
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Editions & Modules
Shared Environment for dev/test
$9.49
per month
Basic Dedicated environment for dev/test
$54.75
per month
Standard Run production workloads
$73
per month
Premium Enhanced performance and scale
$146
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsFree and Shared (preview) plans are ideal for testing applications in a managed Azure environment. Basic, Standard and Premium plans are for production workloads and run on dedicated Virtual Machine instances. Each instance can support multiple applications and domains.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Features
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
8.0
4 Ratings
0% below category average
Google Cloud Run
-
Ratings
Ease of building user interfaces9.94 Ratings00 Ratings
Scalability10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform management overhead4.24 Ratings00 Ratings
Workflow engine capability5.13 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform access control10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Services-enabled integration10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment creation10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Development environment replication10.03 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification8.04 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue recovery6.14 Ratings00 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes5.24 Ratings00 Ratings
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
Azure App Service
-
Ratings
Google Cloud Run
7.3
9 Ratings
9% below category average
Security and Isolation00 Ratings8.59 Ratings
Container Orchestration00 Ratings8.18 Ratings
Cluster Management00 Ratings6.41 Ratings
Storage Management00 Ratings2.71 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization00 Ratings8.09 Ratings
Discovery Tools00 Ratings7.87 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks00 Ratings8.38 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery00 Ratings7.97 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging00 Ratings8.09 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Small Businesses
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.6 out of 10
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
Red Hat OpenShift
Red Hat OpenShift
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
7.6
(8 ratings)
8.3
(9 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
6.4
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure App ServiceGoogle Cloud Run
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
You may easily deploy your apps to Azure App Service if they were written in Visual Studio IDE (typically.NET applications). With a few clicks of the mouse, you may already deploy your application to a remote server using the Visual Studio IDE. As a result of the portal's bulk and complexity, I propose Heroku for less-experienced developers.
Read full review
Google
Microservices and RestFul API application as it is fast and reliant. Seamless integration with event triggers such as pubsub or event arc, so you can easily integrate that with usecases with file uploads, database changes, etc. Basically great with short-lived tasks, if however, you have long-running processses, Cloud Run might not be idle for this. For example if you have a long running data processing task, other solutions such as kubeflow pipelines or dataflow are more suited for this kind of tasks. Cloud Run is also stateless, so if you need memory, you will have to connect an external database.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • It has options to deploy using CI/CD.
  • It has great integration with Azure Devops
  • It has all the common runtimes, so we don't need to install softwares.
Read full review
Google
  • multiple entry points to have a deployment ready (artifact repository, container repository, git actions)
  • easy to use with other Google services with built in connectors for cloud sql and redis
  • great in built logging and monitoring
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • the learning curve can be tough (just like other azure services)
  • the UX/UI could be more intuitive (just like other azure services as well)
  • monitoring can be hard to understand
  • Microsoft's learning resources are hard to understand
Read full review
Google
  • CLI is bloated and can be difficult to get started.
  • The learning curve for configuration is higher than expected for a "simple" paradigm.
  • Limited storage of any kind requires a significant rethink from stateful pipelines.
Read full review
Usability
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Google
The UI/console is great... the documentation is top-notch for developers, but the CLI itself when you have to script around it is very complex and easy to forget some options... the downside of a generic command line client.
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
We had an issue where we deployed too large of a resource and didn't notice until the bill came through. They were very understanding and saw we weren't utilizing the resources so they issued a generous refund in about 4 hours. Very fast, friendly, and understanding support reps from my experience.
Read full review
Google
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
Azure has many data center, their services are more reliable. Azure has way more features than both Linode and DigitalOcean. If someone wants a complete reliable service, he/she must go to Azure instead of Linode and DigitalOcean because even though azure charges more, it is worth the money you pay there.
Read full review
Google
The Goolge docs for their products as well as the UI is a lot nicer than AWS or Azure and in general I found it much easy to work with. We selected Google mainly because of startup credits and the support offered but can confidently say we would choose them again without that added perk in the future
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • Reduced the deployment time of ASP .NET applications in the company.
  • Gave us an alternative to quickly deploy our applications without granting access to the version control system to a third platform.
Read full review
Google
  • allowed for easy deployment
  • allowed teams to get around our normal deployment controls and practices
  • caused fuzziness about when to use which solution
Read full review
ScreenShots