Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

Until the plan changes, which at some point, it will. Comment is still appreciated for what it is.

Edit: Comment is in the spirit of "it gets tiring to build on sand which is at the whims of corporate management folks far disconnected from the actual work." If someone is asserting "this will stick around," words are insufficient, words are free. Show me the contract, show me the penalties for failure to abide by the assertion.

View on HN

This is an Amazon product, not a Google product.

The two have different failure modes.

Google builds up a product over time and abandons it. This is annoying for long term adopters.

AWS has a habit of throwing a bunch of products at the wall, but only bothering to maintain & build up a few of them. This is annoying for early adopters.

Azure on the other hand. Will throw products out, ensure they are never consistent with other offerings on their platform, and then deprecate it from under you while promoting the same thing with a new name.

This is annoying for everyone.

And Azure will send you an email every day about how you need to migrate X to Y without any way for you to know where those instances are or how to find them.

I think there was some truth in this in the early days of Azure (and all clouds) as the companies were looking to work out what cloud services were really needed. I don't see this as much any more though esp when a services makes it to GA they have published commitments for service availability and API compatibility. (I was in Azure for 10+ years so definitely let me know if you disagree)

Yeah I disagree. First of all, Azure is mostly garbage so avoid it if you can. Second of all, Azure deprecation follows Microsoft's general policy of deprecation which is The Fadeaway Policy. Don't publish anything publicly about it, gut the team to go work on something else, transfer the service to be one of 6 dozen other services some random offshore team is "maintaining", experience enough outages and trouble and during every support call they nudge you to move to something else, but the service is "totally not deprecated" because we haven't gotten a memo that says that, but we're only doing "security" fixes now. wink wink, nudge nudge.

Fine to disagree - but it would be better to share real insights rather than just blanket statements. Sounds like you have had some bad experiences - maybe you could share more?

Let me quickly compile a list of the last 700 failing bicep deployments with an “Internal Service Error” or No capacity errors along the all the no-op idempotent puts that take 30+ minutes for some reason, the broken networking system all up, the constant support advise to move to different regions, except half the things you use are not in that region, or the constant advice to just delete everything and start again or the half docs half marketing fluff docs. Azure only exists because large enterprise looks at a list of checkboxes before signing a contract. No reasonable person should ever use that garbage unless you’re offered deep discounts to do so, and even then, limit your usage to things you can migrate easily whenever the discount expires.

Yup I hear you with bicep. Post Microsoft I've used either Terraform or Pulumi. Sorry to hear about the other issues.

To be fair, that's Microsoft in general

Amazon team killed the Copilot CLI[0] which I thought was the single best thing they ever did for AWS infra. Made it tolerable to deploy on AWS; still salty about this one.

[0] https://aws.github.io/copilot-cli/

Yes, we are still struggling with a good replacement. The way they handled this - from steady release cadence to complete stop with no info at all but just speculations makes me very reluctant to adopt AWS maintained projects.

There has been no food replacement as far as I can see that doesn't involve writing a pile of code for what Copilot was doing with a few lines of config.

You're certainly not wrong. But in the wake of Localstack's changes, the landscape has been full of slopware and low trust anyway. I don't think this is worse, for now at least.

Why would you say this? AWS are notorious for maintaining things.

"Things change over time" that is how the linear passage of time tends to work, yes.

I mean isn't that true for every single thing made by anyone? In that case what more do you want from them?

Except for things they make: forever maintained forever.

A bit more polish for a public facing artifact from a multi-billion dollar org with armies of engineers and big token budgets.

The Copilot CLI https://aws.github.io/copilot-cli/ you can feel polish and pride of the team that built this, as an example.

As someone who used QLDB as a WORM audited log for a financial system, and ran AWS classes that used Cloud9, they do depricate.

Not many, and not often but it is annoying.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com