little bit boring

Good

Hello,

Second time for a coffee :)

Please review all the labs of the present course to fit with the specialization labs format. Simplify, go toward essential. I find there is a kinda repetition during the specialization, it's the second time I implement a logbook application. Missing a global specialization timeline. A lack of coherence between theoretical course and practical.

The labs could be so much more practicals, you discussed during all the theoretical course about an application which we never had the possibility to exploit/deploy, how frustrating.

In my opinion, the first lab could be:

OK we don't have the application from the dev, but we they gave us the format of data we can expect + a dataset, first guide the student to generate a

simple mockup of frontend based on Google functions+pub-sub to simulate the calls (Via G console). With templates & provided really deploy the dev part of the application that was described with the first limitation.

Then each labs would start by getting the last iteration corrected of the previous lab from a bucket you provide, first application delivered will have a a poor design which will be modified at each iteration.

Introduce the log management proposed each time and show the student where to find lead to point at the current solution problem (ex: generating fake logs during the first steps), then show how to modify the current deployment template to circumvent the limitation.

Each time add verification steps with pre-named resources like in other courses labs which ensure the progression of the student and do not generate frustration over deployment failure.

We do not need to have a high consuming application, but it should be a lite version of what was discussed.

I hope my reviews won't be too much a bother, I just hope to be able to help you to improve the quality of your course ;) Have a good day.

Regards

repeated labs and material more of deployment manager labs and notes which was already covered. very less of solution discussion. the whole course felt unnesccesary. mostly all covered direcly or indirecly in other course in the series. It would be great if the course had most common solutions like java jee spring/python djaogo production scale or serverles ETL end to end or datawarehouse analytics solution covering all design concpets of resilient high availaility etcc on such projects and covering labs for the same.

I have done a number of courses now and can tell that I do not enjoy the recordings with Jason Baker specifically.

The speaker rambles over slides, reading what the audience is reading anyway, examples are vague and not helpful, it is hard to get relevant knowledge from the lectures.

I like the other speaker Tom Terne, but he merely introduces to the lectures in a very nice and structured way.

In the long term, please consider rerecording the lectures on design process.

Thanks.

There are multiple trainings that are absolutely useless for this level of individual. One is literally just signing in to Quiklabs and closing the project. How is that not just a waste of everyone's time. All the other labs include that step. Why even make that a lab. That is utterly stupid.

Although this course focuses on a deeper understanding of cloud architecting, the labs are repetitive in content and their coverage of the course contents are very low - Its pre-requisites (Architecting GCP courses) have been much better.

The instructor has a lot of knowledge about the subject but lacks about how to teach. It explains too fast, does not make any pause and makes hard to follow the slides.

Kubernetes assignment can't be marked as completed and hence my certification is incomplete. I suggest you verify that and help me out to get my certification.

A repetition of other courses in the track, good for reinforcement however no new information is provided

This course is really important and detail. But the audio volume was low and inconsistent.

The experience with the labas could be improved a lot.

Lab was completed but the system did not reflect that.

90% repeat of prior course content.

I recently completed this course, and it did not live up to my expectations. The lab directions were confusing and unclear, making it difficult to follow. Furthermore, updating grades via the 'Check My Progress' tool was inconvenient and inconsistent. Overall, the experience was poor, and I would not recommend this course because it feels like a waste of money and effort. To justify the cost, improvements to teaching quality and functionality are required.

Worthless class for anyone who has experience as a software engineer or systems administrator. The labs are just making sure you can copy paste (since they don't want admins to learn how to code), and the only GCP-specific information is either advertising for Google or information we learned in previous lessons. I'm glad my company is paying me to do this, because otherwise it would've been a waste of my time.

After completing other courses already, this course starts with an introduction to Qwikilabs!? Most of it is just boringly useless or obsolete as the lengthened videos are indicating

Course gives very basic and obvious principles. It is better to review 4 example companies designs and why they was used in this course. Lab is a mess. container image obsolete.

Honestly, it is not the best , just a few labs , a lot of short videos of less than 30 seconds. You can do better google!

Facing lot of technical issue with Lab.

Good course