4 ms·

I really wish Amazon would choose more intuitive names for their AWS products instead of trying to be clever especially given they must have around 100 products

I really wish Amazon would choose more intuitive names for their AWS products instead of trying to be clever especially given they must have around 100 products now. AWS Cloud IDE or AWS IDE (cloud seems redundant) would give you a good idea what this is without having to click the link for example. Recently we've had AWS Lightsail, Fargate, Greengrass and Sagemaker which all give you zero hint at what they are unless you read more plus they're hard to remember. Even EC2, RDS and S3 should have been given better names.

codefined 9y ago
I quite like this[0] article on what AWS products should have been called. [0] https://www.expeditedssl.com/aws-in-plain-english https://www.expeditedssl.com/aws-in-plain-english
cosmie 9y ago
Cloud9 was the name of the IDE before AWS bought it in 2016[1]. They just wrapped it under the AWS umbrella now with tight AWS integration/support out of the box. [1] https://c9.io/blog/great-news/ https://c9.io/blog/great-news/
deanCommie 9y ago
You completely undermined your whole point with your last sentence. I get that Lightsail isn't intuitive, but what could be more simpler or easier to comprehend than Relational Database Service or Simple Storage Service?
- abiox 9y ago
  based on context i suspect they were talking about the use of initialisms, rather than proper/full names.
- seanwilson 9y ago
  > I get that Lightsail isn't intuitive, but what could be more simpler or easier to comprehend than Relational Database Service or Simple Storage Service? Nobody calls those products by their expanded names though. Why not just AWS Storage or AWS Database? Google for example has Google Cloud Storage and Google Cloud SQL. I get that it becomes trickier when you've got overlapping products but you can't even guess the domain of AWS products from the name they're so obtuse.
  - alexbilbie 9y ago
    AWS has multiple storage and database offerings so having different product names is helpful
twothamendment 9y ago
They all sound like great code names for a project in development, but doesn't amazon have a marketing team? A name that means something would be great. Sagemaker? I don't want to make sage. I just moved away from sage.

codefined 9y ago

I quite like this[0] article on what AWS products should have been called. [0] https://www.expeditedssl.com/aws-in-plain-english https://www.expeditedssl.com/aws-in-plain-english

cosmie 9y ago

Cloud9 was the name of the IDE before AWS bought it in 2016[1]. They just wrapped it under the AWS umbrella now with tight AWS integration/support out of the box. [1] https://c9.io/blog/great-news/ https://c9.io/blog/great-news/

deanCommie 9y ago

You completely undermined your whole point with your last sentence. I get that Lightsail isn't intuitive, but what could be more simpler or easier to comprehend than Relational Database Service or Simple Storage Service?

abiox 9y ago
based on context i suspect they were talking about the use of initialisms, rather than proper/full names.
seanwilson 9y ago
> I get that Lightsail isn't intuitive, but what could be more simpler or easier to comprehend than Relational Database Service or Simple Storage Service? Nobody calls those products by their expanded names though. Why not just AWS Storage or AWS Database? Google for example has Google Cloud Storage and Google Cloud SQL. I get that it becomes trickier when you've got overlapping products but you can't even guess the domain of AWS products from the name they're so obtuse.
- alexbilbie 9y ago
  AWS has multiple storage and database offerings so having different product names is helpful

twothamendment 9y ago

They all sound like great code names for a project in development, but doesn't amazon have a marketing team? A name that means something would be great. Sagemaker? I don't want to make sage. I just moved away from sage.