You might hate the console or CLI tools, but people at Amazon have real data telling them the CX is good enough and their capital would be better spent investing in other features. Source: I work there. :P
What’s your problem domain? You shouldn’t be locked into AWS. No offense, but sounds like bad design or more generally, you or your engineers don’t know what they’re doing.
As a percentage of offerings, how much of the AWS portfolio is portable between clouds? 5%? 1%?
Of course we could re-write on a different cloud, just like Amazon can move off Oracle, but it would take time and we would put up with a lot of abuse before it happened, just like Amazon no doubt did with Oracle.
Which is what you were just bragging about: your numbers show that your customers are locked in enough that you can abuse them plenty before they can effectively retaliate.
You didn’t answer my question and deflected, only responding with personal attacks. Nice.
I still think that your notion of intentional vendor lock in is misinformed at best and poor design and architecting from your side (at worst). I do happen to work at Amazon but my post history will show you how critical I am of the company.
But nothing you’re saying is valid, and I don’t see any parallel here with the migration from Oracle. If you’ve used Oracle DB or have familiarity with its one off special “features”, there’s no parallel between that and using something like RDS or Dynamo. RDS is replaceable. Dynamo is a key value store first and foremost.
There are also enough third party abstractions that let provide you their own configuration and syntax for spinning up resources on AWS, Azure, GCP, etc or mix and match.
DynamoDB is not directly portable, Cassandra is closest, and it's a bear to roll your own. Are you an Amazon employee outright telling people to not use the fundamental datastore of AWS?
S3 also is fairly proprietary, are you, an Amazon employee, outright telling people to not use the fundamental file storage of AWS?
You just wrote that I’m abusing customers and then say it’s not an attack.
S3 is blob storage. Dynamo is a key value store with support for additional indexes. Neither technologies are particularly novel today or provide specific features that would lock you in. You could use comparable technologies on Azure or Google Cloud. Like I said before, you can’t blame Amazon or any cloud provider for poor design/architecting on your end.
Your questions are written as sarcastic personal attacks, which you write instead of posting something of more substance. It seems like you’re just trying to incite a response from me aka trolling. I won’t engage with you anymore. Good luck.
How so? Op is correct - you shouldn’t be using the console to actively manage your infrastructure. The consoles primary purpose is to let you quickly spin up resources while you explore. If you have a real business use case, all your infrastructure should be defined in configuration and deployed out to AWS. That way, you always know what you need to spin up and it’s exact, specific configuration, all stored in source control.
Because when you do that nothing ever needs tweaked on the fly? Because issues of load and scale aren't often times emergent?
I am not making an argument against what you are saying. I am saying that a common interface between the two would be the sane and rational decision. It should be trivial to use the console and turn that back into your new behavior for committing back to your repository.
"The consoles primary purpose is to let you quickly spin up resources while you explore."
And it's pretty bad at this.
I'm not saying the interfaces are the worst ever invented, just that they are a step above internal enterprise software, and despite the fact that AWS makes almost 8 BILLION DOLLARS there appears to be less that 1/1000th of that revenue invested in improving it.
And won't invest in basic stuff like that?
Their CLI is irritating too.