Paying more for more support cases or more urgent responses is standard practice for support plans. For example, here's the AWS Support comparison page:
I agree that Google Cloud offering different response times for different support tiers is consistent with the industry at large.
That being said, Google Cloud support is overly expensive. $150/month Vs. $49/month for AWS Vs. $29/month ($174 minimum commitment over six months) for Azure.
I wish all them had a "per issue" tier. I want to pay for a single ticket/resolution. But at least Google Cloud and AWS don't have a minimum commitment period like Azure (even if Azure is cheap per month).
I'd likely rank them:
- AWS is best (alright price with no commitment).
- Azure is next (amazing price but lame commitment).
- Google Cloud is worst (high price, almost as much as six months at Azure!).
And before you tell me that they offer different things at those price points I DON'T CARE. All I care about is the minimum amount of money I have to pay someone to look at a technical support ticket for me. I don't care if it takes 1 or 48 hours, I just don't want to pay a lot. If I cared about responsiveness I'd be buying the gold plated support with telephone agents.
Google Cloud's $150 to look at one ticket thing really puts me off the entire platform.
> That being said, Google Cloud support is overly expensive. $150/month Vs. $49/month for AWS Vs. $29/month
Your basis for ordering is their support prices which is just a tiny tiny fraction of Cloud infrastructure pricing. Google Cloud is 50% cheaper compared to AWS. Which is huge. Also, thanks to ease of use (Cloud Shell, SSH from browser ..), Google Cloud will save you lot of man hours.
Also talking about commitment, you need to commit for 1-year / 3-year usage of resources and pay partial or full bill in upfront for discounts. Google beats those prices without any commitment.
Let's compare the Cloud providers on these factors.
https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/compare-plans/
which has similar tiers of support.