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
Heroku Platform
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
The Heroku Platform, now from Salesforce, is a platform-as-a-service based on
a managed container system, with integrated data services and ecosystem for deploying modern apps. It takes an app-centric
approach for software delivery, integrated with developer tools and
workflows. It’s three main tool are: Heroku Developer Experience (DX), Heroku
Operational Experience (OpEx), and Heroku Runtime.
Heroku Developer Experience (DX)
Developers deploy directly from tools like…
$25
per month
Pricing
Google App Engine
Heroku Platform
Editions & Modules
Starting Price
$0.05
Per Hour Per Instance
Max Price
$0.30
Per Hour Per Instance
Production
$25.00
per month
Advanced
$250.00
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google App Engine
Heroku Platform
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google App Engine
Heroku Platform
Considered Both Products
Google App Engine
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Google App Engine
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 …
For our organization, we selected Google App Engine which provides a reliable and efficient way to create and deploy apps moreover it supports a lot of languages and provides automatic debugging of code which enables us to deploy code to production as soon as development is …
If you have a small team which is also responsible for development of the product then surely go for it. And if you have a larger team with dedicated person to take care of deployments. Go for cheaper options such as compute engine or AWS (be sure to do your research on pricing …
It's the manageability of the Google App Engine which made it a better option in our case. It's quite straightforward to deploy on App-Engine. No worries for monitoring setup
You can create and scale Kubernetes clusters quickly, but you have to keep an eye on that cluster. In-App Engine, you don't have to worry about infrastructure, but in some scenarios, Kubernetes fits better.
Google App Engine is the first product we picked up to store the mass data. Later we came to know that, firebase database is also similar to Google App Engine. But still, we didn't step into it. We will try it later.
Azure App Service is in par with Google App Engine although you may want to use Azure App Service if you are integrating with other Microsoft IT components, for example SQL Server. Google App Engine is great when in long run, you will be using Google cloud components, for …
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 …
Google App Engine is very easy to use and mostly up to date makes it compatible with all old and new devices. The applications are very interactive and the prices are accessible for most users. The prices tend to get slightly expensive as we head on towards higher …
The two giants are Google and Amazon. Both are very similar however Google App Engine allows you to deploy your web applications through platforms like Python where as if you're using AWS, you have full control on the operating system services. Google is good because you pay as …
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 …
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 …
Google Apps is great for environments where the need for a more robust platform is not necessary if you are looking to have email and cloud collaboration enablement of your working staff. From the stand point of using both, I can see the value of both but it really depends on …
AWS and Heroku are both great, and I use them both extensively for different projects. Google App Engine was chosen because it is much more innovative than AWS, and because Heroku specializes in Ruby on Rails. Even though Heroku supports Java and other services, we feel Google …
With GAE it's a matter of "code your app and deploy it". You don't care on what servers or on how many servers it runs. System administration is done for you. With AWS you still have to be a system administrator with good knowledge and undestanding of load balancers, database …
You can spawn up your own cluster using Kubernetes or Container Engine which will scale automatically when configured properly, but you have to keep an eye on that cluster. In App Engine you don't have to worry about it at all, just ship your code and it will run.
We chose Google App Engine because it supplies the most infrastructure per dollar spent. It's much more expensive to use Amazon EC2 to scale to over a million users. Also, the engine's narrow language support system, while somewhat limiting, makes getting started quickly much …
We left Lotus Notes for the (more versatile) Google Apps. We could never recommend the closed architecture of Lotus Notes. We have evaluated Office 365 and believe the product is compelling. So compelling, that we may consider a platform change…
Heroku was more extensive in terms of its operating and scaling from what we witnessed by looking into other options and trying to find the best operating system for a new platform.
Heroku Platform is cheaper to begin with compared to DigitalOcean or Amazon Fargate. The configuration user interface is also arguably easier to understand. With its user friendliness and cheaper tiers, Heroku Platform was our pick to host some of our applications that were …
I believe Azure App Service is pretty similar to Heroku as you can in both deploy your backend applications. However, the dyno concept and it's drastically simple web dashboard makes Heroku a much better and sane alternative to Azure app service. In Heroku, you get abstracted of …
Kuberbetes is an easily scalable docker based option which should need minimal DevOps, however, it has a pretty high learning curve with many decisions that need to be addressed as well as monitoring, logging and security concerns.
Heroku has the advantage of simplifying the development and integration with some services (which in Heroku they call addon) wherein other platforms, certainly for those who don't have much experience, it will take much more development time.
Heroku, in my opinion, is the easiest platform to deploy and host web applications on. From collaboration to deployment, everything is well thought out and bulletproof. If you need advanced server functionality, like a VPC, machine-to-machine communication, etc., you will …
We also use Cloud 66 which provides some of Heroku's features, at a lower price. It still cannot compare to Heroku's ease of use and ability to easily deploy new staging environments though, so we will always use Heroku for at least some of our projects.
Heroku is an all in 1 package for deploying and running your services. It provides an easy to use setup and run for 90% of cases. If you have a more complicated infrastructure, you'd definitely need to move to another hosting provider. But if as long as you can operate within …
Heroku has advantages over Docker, Google App Engine and AWS products, but it depends largely on your use case. If you are already in AWS, it's probably in your best interest to stay with AWS products. However, other "Cloud Formation/Orchestration" products like Docker are …
We kicked the tires on OpenShift before deciding on Heroku, and found the platform to be much less intuitive and well-documented than Heroku. It felt like we were constantly trying to implement workarounds for esoteric platform problems, and eventually the work became too …
For a different project, Aptible surpassed Heroku when it came to meeting HIPAA-related requirements, though it offers much less flexibility with add-on services (for obvious reasons). Google App Engine had a much more complicated deployment model and seemed unnecessarily …
To this day no other PaaS matches Heroku in ease of use and maturity. If you want to stay 100% focused on your unique product/service rather than wasting time on boilerplate hosting issues, I can highly recommend Heroku. I personally use it for all of my own websites …
Heroku is the more expensive option for hosting compared to some of the cloud platforms we investigated, but it's worth it for us because of the plug-and-play nature of Heroku deployment. We can be up and running in a few minutes and know with precision how much it will cost us …
Heroku has the easy facility to deploy and host applications while others have to configure a lot. The price of the services is high for others. But within Heroku pricing and easy to maintain under the same roof.
Some APIs are specifically developed to be deployed to certain platforms and usually decision which platform to use is not developer's. Another question is deployment cost and pricing model; in specific cases after price comparison Heroku is often selected among other cloud …
Heroku is a really great platform to get up and running QUICKLY and efficiently. What Heroku is really great at that other services are lacking is ease of use, documentation. It is really great for beginning developers and awesome to get up and running to take care of lots of …
I feel Heroku is lightyears ahead of all other PaaS offerings. To me the competition is between PaaS and self-hosted cloud, not between Heroku and other PaaS providers.
Google App Engine and Heroku Platform are application environments and hosts for people who want to focus on development work, not complicated server setup and maintenance. Google App Engine is a large, well-known, robust product that scales automatically for traffic spikes, while Heroku’s smaller pricing tiers and specific focus make it great for smaller teams on a more limited budget.
Features
Google App Engine and Heroku Platform are both quick and simple environments for developers, but there are standout features of each.
After you choose the type of service you want, Google App Engine is priced according to volume, so you pay for exactly what you’ve used. If your site or application experiences a traffic spike, Google App Engine will adjust automatically to handle that traffic, so there’s much less risk of an outage or slowdown. Security features are included with every type of service. Google is a household name, so it’s easy to get clients on board with using it.
Heroku is priced in tiers, and each tier has specific features and workloads, so you’ll never be surprised by your bill. It’s quick and simple to use, and pricing tiers include up-to-date documentation and support. Heroku server monitoring tools are easy to use on desktop or mobile, so you can oversee your applications from anywhere.
Limitations
Though Google App Engine and Heroku Platform provide similar services, each has specific limitations that may inform which one is best for your needs.
Google App Engine may be a robust, well-known product that scales easily, but the scaling comes with a downside. If your application or site experiences a spike in usage, the automatic scaling can lead to a large and unexpected bill. Additionally, the large size of the company means that documentation is often outdated, individual support is difficult to get, and features are sometimes deprecated without warning. And once you set up your application or site in Google App Engine, it’s easy to become locked into Google as a vendor.
Heroku Platform’s tiered pricing is a great feature for those who need their billing to be consistent, but if your app experiences a spike in usage, you must manually upgrade to the next pricing tier. The difference between the Standard 2X and Performance tiers is at least $200 per month, which is not a small amount if you’re running a lean operation. The largest Heroku tiers are $500+ per month, and if you’re running multiple applications, this can add up quickly. Several of the lower pricing tiers do not include security features you may need even for smaller applications.
Pricing
As established, Google App Engine and Heroku Platform use very different pricing methods. Both have free services available for smaller applications or trial uses. Heroku’s lowest tier is $7 per month and includes free SSL, while its highest tier with pricing available is $250-$500 per month and includes dedicated features and autoscaling. More fully featured tiers are available with custom pricing. Google’s pricing is heavily dependent on exactly what features you are using and how much, but the lowest price above the free tier is approximately $30 per month, while the highest prices range into the thousands.
Features
Google App Engine
Heroku Platform
Platform-as-a-Service
Comparison of Platform-as-a-Service features of Product A and Product B
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.
Heroku is very well-suited to early stage and/or rapidly changing projects. It is great for getting moving quickly or changing direction quickly. In scenarios where there is already scale or well-defined requirements, it may be preferable to set things up directly on AWS or another cloud provider to avoid the additional costs of Heroku as the middleman.
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.
Could be less expensive, although you get what you pay for
Sleeping apps can be an annoyance: Heroku automatically puts your apps in sleep mode and they have to spin back up after periods of inactivity. Much of this can be solved but it requires working around the built-in functionality. I understand why they do it but it's an area that could be improved.
Restrictions to server access means you can't customize as much as you could if you owned the server. But again, this is also a benefit because it's about convention over configuration. So you can't configure as much, but then, you typically don't have to.
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.
Heroku is a critical and core part of our infrastructure that is serving our customers well. We are very satisfied with the cost of our solution. While it would be difficult to move away from Heroku, we have no plans to do so. We have had no major issues with it and it is a pleasure to use. Other products on the market might offer comparable functionality, but until we expose a need that Heroku cannot satisfy, we'll stay the course.
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
Deploying apps, scaling , managing environment is very simple. Clean interface for logs, metrics and app settings. Deployment is fast. Don't need deep knowledege of devops or cloud. Buildpacks, pipelines, and review apps makes work easier. Detailed guides help solve common problems fast.
Pricing is higher at scale. Autoscaling options are limited.
Heroku availability correlates pretty strongly to AWS US EAST availability. We had a couple of times where there was a Heroku-specific issue but not for the last 7-8 months.
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.
I've used it for many years without facing any major problem. It's not hard at all to get used to it, it's documentation is outstanding and simple. We are close to 2020 and I don't think most of the existing companies or startups should still face old problems such as wasting time deploying code and calculate computing resources.
Be ready to pay a bit more than expected in the beginning if you're migrating from a big server. The application is probably not ready for the change and you have to keep improving it with time.
It's also important to consider that you can't save anything to the disc as it will be lost when your application restarts, so you have to think about using something like S3.
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.
Heroku has advantages over Docker, Google App Engine and AWS products, but it depends largely on your use case. If you are already in AWS, it's probably in your best interest to stay with AWS products. However, other "Cloud Formation/Orchestration" products like Docker are typically lacking the ease-of-use factor that allows you to get up and running with Heroku quickly.