4 ms·

What kind of company deprecates a URL format that's still recommended by the Object URL in the S3 Management Console? https://www.dropbox.com/s/zzr3r1nvmx6ekct

by btown 8y ago

What kind of company deprecates a URL format that's still recommended by the Object URL in the S3 Management Console? https://www.dropbox.com/s/zzr3r1nvmx6ekct/Screenshot%202019-05-03%2019.32.48.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/zzr3r1nvmx6ekct/Screenshot%202019-... There are so, SO many teams that use S3 for static assets, make sure it's public, and copy that Object URL. We've done this at my company, and I've seen these types of links in many of our partners' CSS files. These links may also be stored deep in databases, or even embedded in Markdown in databases. This will quite literally cause a Y2K-level event, and since all that traffic will still head to S3's servers, it won't even solve any of their routing problems. Set it as a policy for new buckets, if you must, if you change the Object URL output and have a giant disclaimer. But don't. Freaking. Break. The. Web.

EugeneOZ 8y ago
Also in millions of manuals, generated PDFs, sent emails... Some things you just can't "update" anymore.. It's really disastrous change for the web data integrity.
- hueving 8y ago
  One of the magicians in Las Vegas (the one at the MGM) even used s3 image links in emails to send emails to everyone "predicting" the contents of something that hadn't happened.
  - paulddraper 8y ago
    David Copperfield does that.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
parktheredcar 8y ago
I think recent years have proven that despite all the memeing about things like rest, "don't break the web" is not a value shared by all of the parties involved. The takeaway is that for those of us that do still wish to uphold those values, we can let this serve as a lesson that we should not publish assets behind urls we don't control.
jypepin 8y ago
Came here for the same comment. I setup some s3 related stuff less than 2 months ago and the documentation, at least for the js sdk, still recommends the path-style url. I don't even recall a V1/V2 mentioned. That seems very inconvenient, and is pretty inline with my experience with aws: I guess their services are cheap and good, but oh boy! The developer experience is SO bad. - So many services, it is very hard to know what to use for what - Complex and not user friendly APIs - coming with terrible documentation I'm pretty sure they'd get a lot more business if they invested a bit more in developer friendliness - right now I only use aws if a Client really insists on it, because despite having used it a fair amount, I'm still not happy and comfortable with it.
- mabey 8y ago
  Out of curiosity what cloud service do you prefer?
  - jypepin 8y ago
    To be honest, I don't have much experience with the other cloud services, except Heroku which I wouldnt put in the same category. I have a DO box for myself and their docs/admin panels are better imo. But my comment about aws is not really a comparison, just more a comment about my experience as a non-devops engineer, and how I hate having to read their docs.
- jacurtis 8y ago
  Except S3 storage isn't actually all that cheap anymore. Amazon has literally never changed the price of S3 storage over the last decade even though storage costs have plummeted over the same time period. There are other providers out there like Digital Ocean Spaces, Wasabi, and Backblaze that offer storage solutions for much cheaper than S3 now. Digital Ocean Spaces and Wasabi in particular actually use the Amazon S3 api for all their storage. This means you can switch over to either of those solutions without changing the programming of your app or the S3 plugins or libraries that you are currently using. The only thing you change is the base url that you make api calls to. Backblaze has their own API, but they also offer a few additional features not offered under S3's api.
hartleybrody 8y ago
Agreed. Cool URIs don't change. [1] [1] https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI

by btown 8y ago

EugeneOZ 8y ago

Also in millions of manuals, generated PDFs, sent emails... Some things you just can't "update" anymore.. It's really disastrous change for the web data integrity.

hueving 8y ago
One of the magicians in Las Vegas (the one at the MGM) even used s3 image links in emails to send emails to everyone "predicting" the contents of something that hadn't happened.
- paulddraper 8y ago
  David Copperfield does that.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

parktheredcar 8y ago

I think recent years have proven that despite all the memeing about things like rest, "don't break the web" is not a value shared by all of the parties involved. The takeaway is that for those of us that do still wish to uphold those values, we can let this serve as a lesson that we should not publish assets behind urls we don't control.

jypepin 8y ago

Came here for the same comment. I setup some s3 related stuff less than 2 months ago and the documentation, at least for the js sdk, still recommends the path-style url. I don't even recall a V1/V2 mentioned. That seems very inconvenient, and is pretty inline with my experience with aws: I guess their services are cheap and good, but oh boy! The developer experience is SO bad. - So many services, it is very hard to know what to use for what - Complex and not user friendly APIs - coming with terrible documentation I'm pretty sure they'd get a lot more business if they invested a bit more in developer friendliness - right now I only use aws if a Client really insists on it, because despite having used it a fair amount, I'm still not happy and comfortable with it.

mabey 8y ago
Out of curiosity what cloud service do you prefer?
- jypepin 8y ago
  To be honest, I don't have much experience with the other cloud services, except Heroku which I wouldnt put in the same category. I have a DO box for myself and their docs/admin panels are better imo. But my comment about aws is not really a comparison, just more a comment about my experience as a non-devops engineer, and how I hate having to read their docs.
jacurtis 8y ago
Except S3 storage isn't actually all that cheap anymore. Amazon has literally never changed the price of S3 storage over the last decade even though storage costs have plummeted over the same time period. There are other providers out there like Digital Ocean Spaces, Wasabi, and Backblaze that offer storage solutions for much cheaper than S3 now. Digital Ocean Spaces and Wasabi in particular actually use the Amazon S3 api for all their storage. This means you can switch over to either of those solutions without changing the programming of your app or the S3 plugins or libraries that you are currently using. The only thing you change is the base url that you make api calls to. Backblaze has their own API, but they also offer a few additional features not offered under S3's api.

hartleybrody 8y ago

Agreed. Cool URIs don't change. [1] [1] https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI https://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI