1. 27

  2. 9

    As a user of Google Cloud Platform, and also (at Grab) of AWS for 2 years, I can tell you that there’s a world of difference between the philosophies of Amazon and Google when it comes to priorities. I’m not actively developing on AWS, so I don’t have as much of a sense for how often they sunset APIs that they have previously dangled alluringly before unwitting developers.

    That’s correct. AWS still supports SimpleDB (introduced in 2007) which serves no purpose at all since DynamoDB was introduced, except “customers are still using it”. It is entirely obviated by DynamoDB yet the SimpleDB landing page does not mention any plans to deprecate it.

    The comparison of SimpleDB to DynamoDB by the FAQ is hilariously gentle, mentioning benefits to DynamoDB but not explicitly pointing out the lack of any reason to use SimpleDB. lol.

    1. 7

      I actually like GCP in any ways better than AWS… but at the same time, I completely agree. Google just loves breaking their customers’ shit, and “that thing you’re using is going away, do the work yourself to migrate it within the next 6 months or it will just stop working” is pretty much the best case, sometimes they pull a “we’ve disabled this thing, you can’t create any more instances of it, and we’re being really nice by letting your existing ones continue to exist… for now”, without any significant advance notice. They’re making some kind of categorical mistake. I’m not sure exactly what they’re treating their platform as, but it’s not “a platform”.

      1. 1

        “any ways” should read “many ways”.

      2. 6

        There was an argument on lobsters a few days back about whether backwards compatibility was good or bad. I think this is shows that in terms of real-world business costs, backwards compatibility is very good indeed.

        1. 2

          I feel like this writer just picked a tool vendor whose goals didn’t align with his own. It seems like a matter of pros and cons, not right and wrong. Hasn’t Google always been less inclined to backward compatibility than Amazon and Microsoft? They didn’t even keep the lights on at Google Reader when it was the world’s leading RSS product.

          1. 11

            And this article is arguing that Google’s attitude towards backwards compatibility is why GCP is trailing behind AWS and Azure. The examples may be cherry picked but the point stands.

            1. 4

              It’s also of note that the author used to work for Google, so trying out GCP would have been a natural thing for him.

              Also, who out there would want cloud products where there’s a random chance of one of them getting a deprecation notice every 3-6 months (where deprecation means that a service is just gone), and generating that much churn? Like, that seems extreme. I don’t think even the Rails community, which does do more deprecations and that has more version to version churn, would want to deal with that.