[herostratus101]

AWS offers hundreds of very mature, extremely reliable services, many of which have either no competition or half-assed clones with few of the same features.

Serverless is a great example of this. GCP and Azure both have serverless offerings, but neither of them has the equivalent of Lambda Layers, which has been groundbreaking.

Even if we grant that Google's network is better, how can you point to that single dimension and claim that GCP is a better cloud platform? For most business's use cases it would be professional malpractice to recommend GCP over AWS or Azure.

[jedberg]

The products that Google does offer are technically superior to their equivalent products at AWS.

AWS has a much bigger breadth of offerings, and I 100% agree with you that it would be malpractice to recommend GCP over AWS, for myriad reasons.

But by mentioning Lambda layers, for example, you're not making an oranges to oranges comparison.

For the actual functions offering, for example, the Google one is cheaper, has more consistent network access to the data stores, and starts up faster. Technically superior in every way.

But I would never use GCP's serverless offering unless I had to.

[herostratus101]

Whatever the advantages of GCP, they don't amount to "technical superiority" imo.

The fact that Oracle's main relational database offerings are still the most technologically sophisticated does not mean that Oracle Cloud is technologically superior to AWS (or GCP for that matter). It just means that they beat the other cloud providers at one thing.