7 ms·

Sure, a lot of AWS services could have been named better. But a lot of these are terrible, downright misleading names. Some examples: S3 as "Amazon Unlimited

by lukev 8y ago

Sure, a lot of AWS services could have been named better. But a lot of these are terrible, downright misleading names. Some examples: S3 as "Amazon Unlimited FTP Server": S3 has nothing to do with the FTP protocol. VPC as "Amazon Virtual Collocated Rack": VPCs don't have anything to do with either collocation (they can span AZs), much less physical racks. Lambda as "AWS App Scripts": really disagree with this one. Their intent is to be microservices or event handling functions, not scripts. "Scripts" isn't really descriptive but usually implies a manually invoked automation that modifies some kind of stateful resource (such as files). Lambda is basically the exact opposite. There are lots more that are problematic or overly simplified as well. I don't say this to crap on the effort, just... be careful if you're relying on this for your understanding of what AWS does.

iandanforth 8y ago
You can tell the age/mentality of the person who wrote some of these names as they match very closely with my mental models. An "FTP Server" is inaccurate, but perfectly descriptive for me. Scripts is the same thing, "a small program which gets run repeatedly for a very specific task." So I think this is more of a guide for a 30-40 something dev who hasn't bothered to keep up with the proliferation of services.
- WhyNotHugo 8y ago
  Whenever I read FTP, I assume very legacy, very insecure protocols. Mostly because FTP has been considered insecure and kinda deprecated since 1999, and we've had better things (eg: SFTP) since. So, for somebody in their fourties it might be a better name, but for somebody younger, it's definitely misleading.
  - sam0x17 8y ago
    yeah but starting around 2005 if you said "ftp server" it was implied that you would still use encryption via sftp or ftps. Few people will actually spell out sftp server.
  - eksemplar 8y ago
    Sftp servers are still the backbone in a lot of datatransfers. Apparently APIs are really hard for most companies.
- social_quotient 8y ago
  I agree with you and to add. I think of FTP used in describing s3 is kinda like Coke being used to describe all cola based soft drinks. FTP here is a generic descriptor for transferring files, The protocols part is unimportant as is the difference between Coke and Pepsi when you said I’d like a coke. All of the descriptors used for the Aws stack had a similar ring to them with an intended audience of someone a little older and with a little, or more, legacy knowledge about tech. Oddly I could see this useful for two use cases. 1- explaining something to my mom, now over 60 and no longer in the know with regard to tech. Might remember what ftp is or collocation is 2- explaining to an older very siloed technical person, I’m thinking enterprise/gov networking in a place where they don’t get exposure to newer cloud stack stuff. (Banking, healthcare, FEMA)
- rpedela 8y ago
  I'm in that 30-40 range and been programming 20 of that. I definitely would shy away from anything with FTP in the name because of the protocol's historical problems even if that wasn't a fair assumption for the service. Not having FTP in the name was a good decision by Amazon in my opinion. Now is S3 a good name? I don't know.
sadok 8y ago
You are missing the whole point. As a designer that dabbles a bit in code and servers, I literally have NO idea what most of the words you just used mean. I know that S3 has nothing to do with FTP, but it's a nice analogy that I can relate to. Get off your high horse.
- scarface74 8y ago
  Why is he that is on his high horse? It would take watching one or two videos on YouTube or Pluralsight to know on a high level what these services are. If I came to you not knowing anything about the vocabulary used in your field of expertise is that your field’s fault or mine?
- thekelvinliu 8y ago
  the original comment offers some constructive criticism because the article does have the potential to misinform novice users about what certain services do and the technologies they use. yours is more of a directed personal attack; keep in mind that this is hn. good on you for knowing a priori s3 is not ftp. but i wouldn't expect someone new to development to necessarily know this. as a result, they could have an even harder time figuring out how to do things if, for example, they search for advice on how to connect to the s3 ftp server.
  - sam0x17 8y ago
    That said, I would expect someone learning web development to start out the old way like we all did with static HTML and a simple apache server and work their way up to newer things from there. Not doing this runs the risk of completely missing the point of how everything works.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - eksemplar 8y ago
      To what end? Would you also teach someone binary, assembly and C before you taught them JAVA? I see your approach in a lot of fresh graduates. They’ve learned things from the ground up, which means a good chunk of what they’ve learned is useless historic knowledge that doesn’t actually teach you a lot about how the modern eco-system of the web works. That’s time they could have spent learning docker and authentication security. I mean, it’s often the one guy/girl who’s spent their free time setting up ADFS authentication in AWS for the fun of it, who gets the job. But why wouldn’t you teach them that instead of teaching then legacy shit they’ll never use that also isn’t really that handy for understanding how things work now? We’re supposed to stand on the shoulders of giants, and having struggled with apache or better yet the IIS, is just so utterly useless.
sgustard 8y ago
To me a "script" is a piece of code that runs in response to a thing to do a thing. Either manually or automatically. Arguing that it's "basically the exact opposite" is completely non-illuminating.
weliketocode 8y ago
And many of the names proposed don't seem better in any way. - Amazon Transactional Email vs Simple Email Service (SES) - Amazon Queue vs Simple Queue Service (SQS) - Amazon Github vs CodeCommit
TomK32 8y ago
Fully agree on the S3 description, actually S3 stands for something: "Simple Storage Service". Plain enough for me. All those abbrevations should be written out on that webpage.
davidgatti 8y ago
I agree 100%, this description are to simplistic - at the beginning the article should have a warning saying, that this view on what AWS has to offer is just for beginners to help them structure AWS in their heads, but then they should dive deep on their own. For example the S3 mentioned above. It is nothing like an FTP. It is more of a database than a file storage now days. You can literally now use SQL to query data stored in S3 (S3 Select), and S3 is literally used as a database when you store JSON or CSV files. Which if this is all you have the costs are virtually non existent - but no body thinks about S3 this way. I personally had countless clients and developers use it as a FTP and be scared to make thousands of queries a sec - thinking they are dealing with a hard drive. This type of thinking limits you for no good reason. Yes, AWS is wast and complicated - and sure you need a starting point - but you need to be careful when you try to simplify AWS to much, because you'll limit yourself and other from taking advantage of what AWS can actually do for you.
ryantriangles 8y ago
I got the impression that overly simplified was sort of the goal. They don't seem like genuine suggestions for alternative names; the column might have been better named "Think of it as sort of like." S3 has nothing to do with the FTP protocol, but if someone completely new to AWS and similar platforms asked "What's this S3 thing?", you might say "Think of it as sort of like an unlimited FTP server." You can connect to it through programs like CrossFTP, browse a folder hierarchy, upload files, link those files from a website, and in general do all the things people commonly use (S)FTP for, with the same tools they use for (S)FTP stuff. It's similar enough that it makes a good starting analogy. App Scripts is another description I think is reasonable. Personally, I don't think manual invocation or modification of a stateful resource is key to the term 'script.' I think of a script as a relatively simple program that is invoked, accomplishes one task, and then ends without interaction. "Erase duplicate files in folder X" and "send me an email listing all files added today" are examples of scripts you might run as a cron job or in response to an event (like free space dropping below some level). Lambda is close enough to this that I think "Lambda's where you store scripts and define when they get run" is a reasonable explanation.

by lukev 8y ago

iandanforth 8y ago

You can tell the age/mentality of the person who wrote some of these names as they match very closely with my mental models. An "FTP Server" is inaccurate, but perfectly descriptive for me. Scripts is the same thing, "a small program which gets run repeatedly for a very specific task." So I think this is more of a guide for a 30-40 something dev who hasn't bothered to keep up with the proliferation of services.

WhyNotHugo 8y ago
Whenever I read FTP, I assume very legacy, very insecure protocols. Mostly because FTP has been considered insecure and kinda deprecated since 1999, and we've had better things (eg: SFTP) since. So, for somebody in their fourties it might be a better name, but for somebody younger, it's definitely misleading.
- sam0x17 8y ago
  yeah but starting around 2005 if you said "ftp server" it was implied that you would still use encryption via sftp or ftps. Few people will actually spell out sftp server.
- eksemplar 8y ago
  Sftp servers are still the backbone in a lot of datatransfers. Apparently APIs are really hard for most companies.
social_quotient 8y ago
I agree with you and to add. I think of FTP used in describing s3 is kinda like Coke being used to describe all cola based soft drinks. FTP here is a generic descriptor for transferring files, The protocols part is unimportant as is the difference between Coke and Pepsi when you said I’d like a coke. All of the descriptors used for the Aws stack had a similar ring to them with an intended audience of someone a little older and with a little, or more, legacy knowledge about tech. Oddly I could see this useful for two use cases. 1- explaining something to my mom, now over 60 and no longer in the know with regard to tech. Might remember what ftp is or collocation is 2- explaining to an older very siloed technical person, I’m thinking enterprise/gov networking in a place where they don’t get exposure to newer cloud stack stuff. (Banking, healthcare, FEMA)
rpedela 8y ago
I'm in that 30-40 range and been programming 20 of that. I definitely would shy away from anything with FTP in the name because of the protocol's historical problems even if that wasn't a fair assumption for the service. Not having FTP in the name was a good decision by Amazon in my opinion. Now is S3 a good name? I don't know.

sadok 8y ago

You are missing the whole point. As a designer that dabbles a bit in code and servers, I literally have NO idea what most of the words you just used mean. I know that S3 has nothing to do with FTP, but it's a nice analogy that I can relate to. Get off your high horse.

scarface74 8y ago
Why is he that is on his high horse? It would take watching one or two videos on YouTube or Pluralsight to know on a high level what these services are. If I came to you not knowing anything about the vocabulary used in your field of expertise is that your field’s fault or mine?
thekelvinliu 8y ago
the original comment offers some constructive criticism because the article does have the potential to misinform novice users about what certain services do and the technologies they use. yours is more of a directed personal attack; keep in mind that this is hn. good on you for knowing a priori s3 is not ftp. but i wouldn't expect someone new to development to necessarily know this. as a result, they could have an even harder time figuring out how to do things if, for example, they search for advice on how to connect to the s3 ftp server.
- sam0x17 8y ago
  That said, I would expect someone learning web development to start out the old way like we all did with static HTML and a simple apache server and work their way up to newer things from there. Not doing this runs the risk of completely missing the point of how everything works.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - eksemplar 8y ago
    To what end? Would you also teach someone binary, assembly and C before you taught them JAVA? I see your approach in a lot of fresh graduates. They’ve learned things from the ground up, which means a good chunk of what they’ve learned is useless historic knowledge that doesn’t actually teach you a lot about how the modern eco-system of the web works. That’s time they could have spent learning docker and authentication security. I mean, it’s often the one guy/girl who’s spent their free time setting up ADFS authentication in AWS for the fun of it, who gets the job. But why wouldn’t you teach them that instead of teaching then legacy shit they’ll never use that also isn’t really that handy for understanding how things work now? We’re supposed to stand on the shoulders of giants, and having struggled with apache or better yet the IIS, is just so utterly useless.

sgustard 8y ago

To me a "script" is a piece of code that runs in response to a thing to do a thing. Either manually or automatically. Arguing that it's "basically the exact opposite" is completely non-illuminating.

weliketocode 8y ago

And many of the names proposed don't seem better in any way. - Amazon Transactional Email vs Simple Email Service (SES) - Amazon Queue vs Simple Queue Service (SQS) - Amazon Github vs CodeCommit

TomK32 8y ago

Fully agree on the S3 description, actually S3 stands for something: "Simple Storage Service". Plain enough for me. All those abbrevations should be written out on that webpage.

davidgatti 8y ago

I agree 100%, this description are to simplistic - at the beginning the article should have a warning saying, that this view on what AWS has to offer is just for beginners to help them structure AWS in their heads, but then they should dive deep on their own. For example the S3 mentioned above. It is nothing like an FTP. It is more of a database than a file storage now days. You can literally now use SQL to query data stored in S3 (S3 Select), and S3 is literally used as a database when you store JSON or CSV files. Which if this is all you have the costs are virtually non existent - but no body thinks about S3 this way. I personally had countless clients and developers use it as a FTP and be scared to make thousands of queries a sec - thinking they are dealing with a hard drive. This type of thinking limits you for no good reason. Yes, AWS is wast and complicated - and sure you need a starting point - but you need to be careful when you try to simplify AWS to much, because you'll limit yourself and other from taking advantage of what AWS can actually do for you.

ryantriangles 8y ago

I got the impression that overly simplified was sort of the goal. They don't seem like genuine suggestions for alternative names; the column might have been better named "Think of it as sort of like." S3 has nothing to do with the FTP protocol, but if someone completely new to AWS and similar platforms asked "What's this S3 thing?", you might say "Think of it as sort of like an unlimited FTP server." You can connect to it through programs like CrossFTP, browse a folder hierarchy, upload files, link those files from a website, and in general do all the things people commonly use (S)FTP for, with the same tools they use for (S)FTP stuff. It's similar enough that it makes a good starting analogy. App Scripts is another description I think is reasonable. Personally, I don't think manual invocation or modification of a stateful resource is key to the term 'script.' I think of a script as a relatively simple program that is invoked, accomplishes one task, and then ends without interaction. "Erase duplicate files in folder X" and "send me an email listing all files added today" are examples of scripts you might run as a cron job or in response to an event (like free space dropping below some level). Lambda is close enough to this that I think "Lambda's where you store scripts and define when they get run" is a reasonable explanation.