I think YRMV depending on what you're trying to do, but I think the DX & web console experience is much more pleasant on GCP.
On GCP, their services are cleanly organized and have distinct icons that tell me what it does with minimal reading. On AWS, often I'm left scratching my head (see https://awsiconquiz.com/)
The web console design on AWS is catching up (for a long time the UI just looked like an offshoot of the e-commerce site design and wasn't very clean) to GCP, but occasionally you still find elements of the old AWS console design.
Often, it seems like AWS has more leaky abstractions that require you to be more aware of all the other connecting components of their infra services.
For example, trying running managed Airflow on AWS/GCP. Both services require some VPC & storage infra setup to get your Airflow container services running. On GCP, you can spin up Cloud Composer without specifying your VPC or storage bucket details and they'll default them for you.
AWS however, you'll need to have your VPC/S3 already setup ahead and if you've not configured your private/public subnets or S3 IAM policy, you can put your Airflow environment into a non-workable state.
Overall, I think GCP has some advantages of not being saddled with legacy baggage that AWS has with making sure their services are interoperable.
I agree - Kubernetes on AWS was a bit of a shock after using it on GCP (yay) and Azure (meh). I think it makes sense if you've used AWS for a while, and know the security groups etc dance, but it was a bit jarring.
On GCP, their services are cleanly organized and have distinct icons that tell me what it does with minimal reading. On AWS, often I'm left scratching my head (see https://awsiconquiz.com/)
The web console design on AWS is catching up (for a long time the UI just looked like an offshoot of the e-commerce site design and wasn't very clean) to GCP, but occasionally you still find elements of the old AWS console design.
Often, it seems like AWS has more leaky abstractions that require you to be more aware of all the other connecting components of their infra services.
For example, trying running managed Airflow on AWS/GCP. Both services require some VPC & storage infra setup to get your Airflow container services running. On GCP, you can spin up Cloud Composer without specifying your VPC or storage bucket details and they'll default them for you.
AWS however, you'll need to have your VPC/S3 already setup ahead and if you've not configured your private/public subnets or S3 IAM policy, you can put your Airflow environment into a non-workable state.
Overall, I think GCP has some advantages of not being saddled with legacy baggage that AWS has with making sure their services are interoperable.