[staticassertion]

I mean, what would you call it? It's basically a 'push/pop' interface with timeouts. Like, do you think 'Kafka' is more descriptive? Or Prometheus? Or any of the essentially randomly generated names that various projects and products choose?

By the standard of tech names SQS seems, relatively speaking, extremely descriptive.

[dijit]

Amazon Queue Service.

Or pubsub.

[flatiron]

Having them start everything with “Amazon” would put them in the “kde” league of everything stupidly starting with k for no reason other than to start with k.

[dylan604]

yeah, but intentionally misspelling words to include a silent 'k' is a fun gimmicy thing. GNU does similar do they gnot?

[calvinmorrison]

KuqueServive

[411111111111111]

So that would make it AQS or PSS.... Is that really easier to understand then SQS?

[Kwpolska]

No, but they could just use "Queue Service" as the main branding.

[dijit]

"pubsub" is the same number of syllables as "PS"

[staticassertion]

I'm really failing to see how that's any clearer. If you're looking at SQS you probably already know it's an AWS service, and pubsub seems less descriptive than queue...

[lentil]

pubsub would also be misleading, given SQS does not support the pub/sub pattern. It's a queue where each message is processed once by a single consumer; it's not a pub/sub system where multiple consumers can subscribe to messages of interest.

[staticassertion]

Yeah, it's actually less correct, not less descriptive - I mispoke.