This is great ! Thanks
Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
11–20 of 93 posts
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#12Some of these are clearly deliberate obfuscation. I need something to handle Queues, what should I use? Amazon SQS obviously. Oh cool, what’s that? It’s a Queue service! Oh great, why is called SQS? Simple Queue Service duh! Is there a more complex queuing service? No. There’s only SQS. The acronym is totally useless, tells you nothing beyond it being for Queues and completely obfuscates what’s happening for anyone n…
I mean, what would you call it? It's basically a 'push/pop' interface with timeouts. Like, do you think 'Kafka' is more descriptive? Or Prometheus? Or any of the essentially randomly generated names that various projects and products choose? By the standard of tech names SQS seems, relatively speaking, extremely descriptive.
Amazon Queue Service.
Or pubsub.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#13IAM "Should have been called Users, Keys and Certs" That's funny. Because we have hundreds of developers using AWS every day, using IAM all the time, and never using a single IAM User. IAM is actually named extremely well. identity and Access Management. I can't think of a better name. And if your problem is that you just don't like acronyms, you probably picked the wrong industry.
Agreed. “Users, Keys and Certs” neglects the whole roles / permissions aspects of IAM, which in my experience is by far the larger part of IAM.
The users & keys part is actually just a tiny part of it.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#14Some of these are clearly deliberate obfuscation. I need something to handle Queues, what should I use? Amazon SQS obviously. Oh cool, what’s that? It’s a Queue service! Oh great, why is called SQS? Simple Queue Service duh! Is there a more complex queuing service? No. There’s only SQS. The acronym is totally useless, tells you nothing beyond it being for Queues and completely obfuscates what’s happening for anyone n…
I think SQS was the first AWS offering. In that context “simple” means simple compared to other offerings of the 2000s/rolling it out yourself. I agree it’s a little convoluted for newcomers in 2021 although probably unintentional.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#15What's in a name? Really, is "Amazon Virtual Servers" much better than "Elastic Compute" ? Maybe slightly. But at the end of the day you have to go look at it and see wtf that means no matter what, and the 'elastic' verbiage is fairly consistent across AWS products. IAM is similarly not that bad - Identity Access Management pretty much tells me what it is. When we have a field where things are named in extremely uncl…
I think everything you said just pointed out how bad it really is in the field. You either have an acronym, which people assume you know, or nonsense words. Boring descriptive names are better, but don't look as good when marketing the product (I'd assume).
What's a boring descriptive name that people wouldn't want to turn into an acronym for "Identity and Access Management"?
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#16IAM "Should have been called Users, Keys and Certs" That's funny. Because we have hundreds of developers using AWS every day, using IAM all the time, and never using a single IAM User. IAM is actually named extremely well. identity and Access Management. I can't think of a better name. And if your problem is that you just don't like acronyms, you probably picked the wrong industry.
I just realized. Is it a play on the phrase “I am”? If that’s obvious, it just clicked with me after using AWS for ten years.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#17IAM "Should have been called Users, Keys and Certs" That's funny. Because we have hundreds of developers using AWS every day, using IAM all the time, and never using a single IAM User. IAM is actually named extremely well. identity and Access Management. I can't think of a better name. And if your problem is that you just don't like acronyms, you probably picked the wrong industry.
I just realized. Is it a play on the phrase “I am”? If that’s obvious, it just clicked with me after using AWS for ten years.
Identity and Access Management existed as a term long before AWS. They called the feature the same name as what people called what that feature does.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, what would you call it? It's basically a 'push/pop' interface with timeouts. Like, do you think 'Kafka' is more descriptive? Or Prometheus? Or any of the essentially randomly generated names that various projects and products choose? By the standard of tech names SQS seems, relatively speaking, extremely descriptive.
Amazon Queue Service. Or pubsub.
Having them start everything with “Amazon” would put them in the “kde” league of everything stupidly starting with k for no reason other than to start with k.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#19This feels like it was written by a late 90's sysadmin who just teleported to 2021 and has no idea how things operate today.
Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)
#20not as complete, but see also https://gist.github.com/miglen/f6eef81803a43dad434d for AWS and GCP side by side in plain english
Thanks for the share. I actually find your link more useful than what the OP offers.
If anyone finds the same with azure also, I'm interested.