Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

web3us.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#71

Post by staticassertion »

dijit wrote: post #12
staticassertion wrote: post #6

Earlier 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.

I'm really failing to see how that's any clearer. If you're looking at SQS you probably already know it's an AWS service, and pubsub seems less descriptive than queue...

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#72

Post by miga »

adambatkin wrote: post #60
Traster wrote: post #5

Some 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…

AWS offers a bunch of different queue-like services: SQS, Kinesis, MSK, Amazon MQ (supporting both ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ). I don't think it's possible to build a queue-as-a-service that is any simpler than SQS, so there is literally no better name than SQS. (also, the suggested name "Amazon Queue" is pretty similar to the name "Amazon MQ" which does in fact exist) It's a queue. It supports enqueue and dequeue. And th…

Purportedly Simple Queue Service?

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#73

Post by hypertele-Xii »

dylan604 wrote: post #50
chrsig wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can certainly agree that some of those descriptions don't fully encompass what you're getting. Some of your points are more picking at the authors choice of simplifying language, rather than the effort to simplify the names themselves. Some of the names are completely uninformative though -- cognito for example doesn't convey anything about oauth. Neptune doesn't make me think graph database. Kinesis doesn't make m…

>Some of the names are completely uninformative though Does Microsoft make you think computer OS? Does Apple make you think of computers and personal devices? Do common names Alexa/Siri mean anything specific to you? None of the words used in those examples have anything to do with what they do, but they are now synonymous with everything you think of when those words are spoken/written. That's because the companies…

Huh? Microsoft is almost literally microprocessor software. Sounds pretty descriptive to me.

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#74

Post by miga »

dexterdog wrote: post #27
Traster wrote: post #5

Some 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…

Hey, at least it has a Q in the initialism even though it's not in the first position.

That is why it should be called Qinesis, but this trademark was already taken!

https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/qinesis/technology

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#77

Post by dylan604 »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #73
dylan604 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Some of the names are completely uninformative though Does Microsoft make you think computer OS? Does Apple make you think of computers and personal devices? Do common names Alexa/Siri mean anything specific to you? None of the words used in those examples have anything to do with what they do, but they are now synonymous with everything you think of when those words are spoken/written. That's because the companies…

Huh? Microsoft is almost literally microprocessor software. Sounds pretty descriptive to me.

I had intended to add Windows to that, but my brain-to-typing-fingers skipped over it. The word "Windows" tells me nothing about what it does in the "same contenxt" as what's being discussed here. We've just had that crap shoved down our gullets for all this time it has become synonymous with software operating system not because the word is descriptive of purpose.

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#78

Post by lentil »

staticassertion wrote: post #71
dijit wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon Queue Service. Or pubsub.

I'm really failing to see how that's any clearer. If you're looking at SQS you probably already know it's an AWS service, and pubsub seems less descriptive than queue...

pubsub would also be misleading, given SQS does not support the pub/sub pattern. It's a queue where each message is processed once by a single consumer; it's not a pub/sub system where multiple consumers can subscribe to messages of interest.

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#79

Post by staticassertion »

lentil wrote: post #78
staticassertion wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really failing to see how that's any clearer. If you're looking at SQS you probably already know it's an AWS service, and pubsub seems less descriptive than queue...

pubsub would also be misleading, given SQS does not support the pub/sub pattern. It's a queue where each message is processed once by a single consumer; it's not a pub/sub system where multiple consumers can subscribe to messages of interest.

Yeah, it's actually less correct, not less descriptive - I mispoke.

Re: Amazon Web Services In Plain English (2019)

#80

Post by jlg23 »

adambatkin wrote: post #8

IAM "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.

> And if your problem is that you just don't like acronyms, you probably picked the wrong industry.

Once upon a time, I worked for a company that bought a lot of IBM's 8656-1RY, which was later renamed to "x-series $whatever", according to some obscure scheme made up by marketing. Fortunately, the Japanese site was not yet updated, so I could get firmware updates through them. Some weeks later, an IBM representative showed up, he did not even try to sell us anything after complimenting us on finishing some setup work for 10% of the effort he would have billed us. "Any questions?" "Yes, what's with the naming scheme?" He smiled, pulled out a mouse-pad "the evolution of the x-series". "Yes, marketing-BS, but that's the only documentation on the renaming we've got".

Summa summarum: Criticizing some intrinsics does not automatically put you in "the wrong industry", maybe you just have seen enough to call BS BS when you see it.

Post reply on HN