| edit: typo, changed $700,000 to $70,000. Also note that isn't income, but revenue. > For a certain size of customer this problem does go away > We have an account manager, have received lots of support from Google in setting up, have been able to trial products in closed alpha before release, and haven't been hit by any meaningful deprecations Too bad that level of customer service doesn't extend across their offerings and to smaller customers. A conservative estimate puts my wife's losses at just over $70,000 for the time her accounts were disabled. That doesn't include potential referrals from customers she would have gained during that time. I've been an Amazon customer for years, for several of their products, and I have yet to experience an issue that wasn't handled promptly and to my satisfaction. Several companies I've worked for have used AWS, and we experienced that same commitment to customer service. My network from those companies use AWS for their side projects and startups. > we are not a Google competitor, and one of our major partners considered it a significant benefit of using us that we did not host on Amazon services. Some companies don't use or have moved off of GCP for similar reasons. |
I do see a lot of people extrapolating from what is essentially individual customer support up to company customer support. It's not far off extrapolating from a bad experience as an Amazon customer to AWS being a bad option – a comparison I don't often see being made.
I've seen terrible support from AWS on reasonably sized contracts, and I've seen good support from GCP on small contracts. While it's true that on average Amazon's consumer level support is better than Google's, and it may be true that AWS's support is often better than GCP's, these are not hard rules and I think the reality is that GCP is much better than many AWS users give it credit for.
Plus we're only talking about support here! I find GCP a far better product than AWS, but that's a bigger discussion.