Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Google App Engine

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is designed to make deploying and managing containerized applications easy. It offers serverless Kubernetes, an integrated continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) experience, and enterprise-grade security and governance. It allows development and operations teams on a single platform to rapidly build, deliver, and scale applications with confidence.N/A
Google App Engine
Score 8.1 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
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Starting Price
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Max Price
$0.30
Per Hour Per Instance
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Features
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Container Management
Comparison of Container Management features of Product A and Product B
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
7.6
5 Ratings
7% below category average
Google App Engine
-
Ratings
Security and Isolation8.65 Ratings00 Ratings
Container Orchestration8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Cluster Management7.45 Ratings00 Ratings
Storage Management7.45 Ratings00 Ratings
Resource Allocation and Optimization8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Discovery Tools6.95 Ratings00 Ratings
Update Rollouts and Rollbacks6.45 Ratings00 Ratings
Self-Healing and Recovery8.05 Ratings00 Ratings
Analytics, Monitoring, and Logging7.65 Ratings00 Ratings
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
-
Ratings
Google App Engine
9.5
32 Ratings
20% above category average
Ease of building user interfaces00 Ratings9.018 Ratings
Scalability00 Ratings10.032 Ratings
Platform management overhead00 Ratings9.032 Ratings
Workflow engine capability00 Ratings8.024 Ratings
Platform access control00 Ratings10.031 Ratings
Services-enabled integration00 Ratings10.028 Ratings
Development environment creation00 Ratings10.029 Ratings
Development environment replication00 Ratings10.028 Ratings
Issue monitoring and notification00 Ratings9.028 Ratings
Issue recovery00 Ratings9.026 Ratings
Upgrades and platform fixes00 Ratings10.029 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Small Businesses
Portainer
Portainer
Score 9.0 out of 10
AWS Lambda
AWS Lambda
Score 8.3 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 Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
7.0
(6 ratings)
8.0
(35 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(8 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(1 ratings)
7.7
(7 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
8.4
(12 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)Google App Engine
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
AKS works very well for running containerized applications that require high availability and scalability. This includes systems like our HRIS platform and customer-facing web applications. AKS is a good choice when applications are broken into multiple services that need independent scaling and deployment. It provides the flexibility needed to manage these architectures effectively. But for single, low-traffic applications or simple internal tools, AKS can be overkill. For scenarios like that Azure App Service would be better.
Read full review
Google
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.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • AKS makes it easier to replicate data to multiple regions
  • Azure portal make it easier to manage the resources of the organization
Read full review
Google
  • Quick to develop, quick to deploy. You can be up and running on Google App Engine in no time.
  • Flexible. We use Java for some services and Node.js for others.
  • Great security features. We have been consistently impressed with the security and authentication features of Google App Engine.
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • Steep learning curve
  • Expected charges are unclear until you see real production usage
  • Operations teams need to learn an entirely new skill set
Read full review
Google
  • 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)
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Google
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
Usability
Microsoft
As already said, the UI/CLI and even terraform are perfectly fine, but certain details could be documented better. For instance, if I want to secure the whole Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) with my own managed keys, then it is very complex and hard to get there. Not really a single source that gives you the whole picture. Besides that, it is still good to use, in most cases intuitive but details mentioned as above can be tricky.
Read full review
Google
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
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
Microsoft support was really good, whenever we raise any ticket they come back to us within a couple of hours.
Read full review
Google
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
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
Amazon EKS stacked up very well and had better performance in some areas. However, Azure Kubernetes Service was a better fit given our Azure environment.
Read full review
Google
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.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • We had to spend more time on Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) than on AWS and GCP to get our kubernetes cluster up and running
  • The resources on nodes need to be left out unused, so effectively it is wasting money there
  • It definitely made us spend more time into maintaining kubernetes
Read full review
Google
  • Effective employee adoption through ease of use.
  • 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.
Read full review
ScreenShots