Google Appengine



It was good while it lasted, Google AppEngine gave developers an easy way to create web applications without worrying about scaling it or being a sysadmin. There were numerous startups that built their products on Google Appengine. Even after beta, there was a fairly large free quota that made it a reasonable choice. But, the current pricing seems a bit ridiculous for those who are looking for a free or cheap solution or for those enjoyed the initial quotas. Perhaps, we were spoiled and Google’s goal is to get rid of free-riders which is not exactly evil from Google’s perspective.

So, it is 2012 and welcome to reality since Google can’t maintain those quotas forever and the current free quotas are intended to only test your application before you go live. If for some strange reason, your application becomes popular and gets more than 1,000 users, you would end up scrambling for an alternate solution since you will find yourself paying through the nose. The quota system is complicated than is necessary from user's perspective and with constant changes to the billing policies it gets more confusing. This is even more painful since you probably have already worked around those SQL limitations in AppEngine store, quota restrictions and lack of file access, time restrictions etc. Frankly, save yourselves the trouble and gain control of your business. Stay away from Google’s AppEngine to begin with.

It is definitely useful for simple apps for your friends and small businesses with sufficient funding as long as you are not hugely successful. There are also open source alternatives to host Google Appengine code like AppScale, but then why bother? Why don’t you just start with a clean slate and pick the right technology stack that gives you the flexibility and control from day one! Obviously, don’t take this as the right answer for everyone, there is a market for the product which is probably why Google is able to raise the prices multiple times and still be successful. I had also seen similar blogs where people commented RTFM, why did you choose to stick with a locked in solution, were you stupid etc if you complained about GAE.

I am hoping this blog helps some small startups out there who is evaluating whether to use Google AppEngine stack or not for a complex web application. The startup companies usually have strong technical talent, but has limited cash. It is easy to get to 1,000 users, especially with free apps. Startups also aim to make profits by gaining millions of users, so beware of Google AppEngine. Don't lock your future to Google. Still, if you have limited users or you are willing to pay for AppEngine usage which is higher than other options available, then Google Appengine is the right choice because it offers a lot of convenience for the non-Linux savvy user. It is also good for quick prototyping as long as you are happy with the sandboxed environment.

Other options include Amazon EC2, AppScale, Windows Azure, Salesforce.com, Apache Hadoop, Joyent etc.

Finally, Google does seems to be having an evil streak nowadays with the change in privacy policy, Kenyan scandal, OpenMaps accusation, not indexing competitor content from Twitter, Facebook etc. It may be a sign of growing up, perhaps new start-ups should stay away from such mottos! , Sure, Google has done a lot of good things to developers like open sourcing everything that helps their business model (search code is still closed), Android is open sourced with a hidden whip, users got a lot of free web apps that in turn helped its search empire etc. I do have a lot of respect for Google as a technical company that gave us Pagerank, MapReduce, GFS, Maps etc. But, with AppEngine Google is squandering away the goodwill from a lot of successful developers and early adopters with regular "planned" price increases, system downtimes etc.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I agree with this 100%, we recently ported our application away from Google AppEngine as well before it was too late. They need to make money, but locking in users and then raising rates is rather unfair.
11:29 AM
Anonymous said…
If Google's App Engine is not good for startups or for scaling your apps cost effectively; then what is it good for?
12:41 PM
Vishnu Varadaraj said…
It might still be useful in specific contexts like you have a great idea to make money, and you want to get to the market fast. Then, paying Google its share would make sense. But, you might have to obviously re-think your strategy for hosting free apps on GAE. In short, take these inputs and think what is good for you!
12:45 PM
önder said…
thank you
6:05 AM
Iqra Khan said…
Come forward to us & get solution for your income problems ,(11548)
Complete Our 3 day work at home training course and be
placed in a work at home job, with a real company that
will earn you over $50,000 per year Guaranteed!
Earn up to $100,000 Per year from home
as a certified home worker for more details visit: (http://www.JobzInn.com)
6:42 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blackberry Playbook

RIM introduced the "Playbook" tablet computer with much fanfare yesterday.It relies on Flash & HTML5 as the key development platforms. RIM was able to build the compatibility for existing apps on top of QNX which is good. It was smart to rely on the HTML5 platform given the poor UI capabilities in the existing Java framework, it wasn't clear if the tablet supported native game development despite the support for OpenGL in QNX platform. The specs are great compared to the existing iPad, RIM did need some +ve hype at this point after the Torch fiasco. It is just 10mm thick compared to 13.4mm for the iPad and I thought iPad was thin. It has a 7" screen, but the resolution is 1024x600 whereas it is 1024x768 for the 9.7" iPad. Playbook also comes with a dual core 1GHZ processor compared to the single core CPU in iPad. Playbook also comes with front and back cameras and HD display with HDMI output compared with none for iPad. It also tethers with the Blackberr...
Read more

What is up with RIM?

RIM is one of the leading technology companies in Canada and one of the largest employers in Waterloo. There are a few strategic mistakes that seem obvious in hindsight, but it is easier to list them now than to predict in advance. RIM is losing market share in North America, but surprisingly the execs were focusing on developing markets for growth. Obviously, profit margins from developing countries are minimal when compared to the lucrative NA market. RIM’s strength is in the enterprise market. The primary growth is happening in consumer market, but RIM has had trouble gaining traction there. RIM will continue to rule the enterprise for now, because changes come at a slow pace there. Still, the consumerization of IT is the biggest threat for RIM in this area. The current instability doesn't help them advance in enterprise either. RIM is losing the high end smart phone market which is ruled by Apple and Android devices, but instead is happy with the wins in mid-low end ...
Read more