[dklsafhjskljfl]

Aside from pricing (different workloads yield different results), I'd say that:

GCP has much more modern APIs (they got to do "right" the first time around, while AWS had to learn from their "mistakes")

GCP is less mature with documentation, but still excellent (AWS is first class). I've found bugs, and others I know have run into straight up wrong docs - a quick message to support yielded the correct information and docs update within the week.

GCP is far more "opinionated" about how you should run a service. AWS is opinionated as well, but less so. What this means is that while GCP will sell you resources in traditional way, to go GCP native or from scratch really requires buying into the GCP "way" of doing things more than AWS does. Basically, K8S or go home.

We use GCP and I enjoy it quite a bit. I have extensive AWS experience as well, but no strong preference.

[lrem]

GCP is not done "right the first time". Most of the interesting things you see in GCP are 3rd-5th generations of internal products.

[falcor84]

How is that a contradiction? You are saying that by the time the products made it to become external SPIs, they were already battle tested, right?

[lrem]

That's true, but I wasn't trying to contradict, only explain why some Google's products feel so polished since early access. Also explains why some designs may feel awkward: they were assuming the user to be Google products, with all the ballast of building for a billion users.