[ehaikawaii]

This is why everything Google feels evolved, nothing lasts long enough to be obvious legacy bullshit.

Cut backs have finally forced AWS to sunset services, but they just hard refused for many, many years. People like using it because the workflows evolve, but AWS will not force migrations on you, sometimes to your own detriment.

When you first build an app, everything is fresh because developers haven't had to hamfistedly shove assumption breaking models and patterns into their program yet.

Cloud customers want to evolve to the latest tech, but redoing 20 years of the company for no business reason makes programmers happy but executives nervous.

[srockets]

AWS used to just bake keeping the light on into the cost of launching a product. They wouldn’t launch something they weren’t ready to support until the sun becomes a supernova.

Sadly, that seems to not be the case anymore, and it’s a worrying development. AWS giving up on their customer obsession makes it easier for the other CSPs, who aren’t as customer friendly, to compete.

[throwaway290]

What did AWS sunset? I probably didn't use any of what they killed so that's why unaware, would be good to know

[gregw2]

SimpleDB, S3 Select, old style EC2s outside VPCs, QLDB, AWS Data Pipelines, Cloud9, CodeCommit, SnowMobile, Forecast are the ones I know. A few more can be found at: https://github.com/SummitRoute/aws_breaking_changes https://www.thestack.technology/aws-deprecations-services-co...

From the outside I dont perceive the promotion dynamics for engineers working on old services is that different at AWS than Google or Azure. Finance and engineering do conspire to kill off things despite customer annoyance, perhaps as they should.

There is also a constant churn of retiring EC2 instance types, security certs, old database versions, EMR versions, OS versions, security practices, cost optimizations, etc to suck up your time with minimal business value. This is not different fundamentally than on prem, you just have slightly less control and an outside party forcing your hand to do the right thing isnt purely a bad thing...

AWS is pretty good about giving you a grace period to migrate off and informal warnings if they strategically want you to move to a different service of theirs before stuff gets killed if you are looped in with a TAM (e.g Data Pipelines vs more-expensive Glue). They seem to have recently migrated to a strategy where they disable services for new customers but actually dont kill them completely off but keep them on life support.

[JackSlateur]

Yes

The only product I know well in your list is pre-VPC ec2 instances, which (to be fair) are a terrible product : it is cross tenant (as in : you can impact other customers). Good riddance.

I think many AWS services are well designed : isolated software-only components. They build a lot on top of a very stable infrastructure (VPC / s3 / ec2 / IAM), which means supporting a service is really cheap : they are just a couple of containers running somewhere

[ocrow]

For one, the OpsWorks configuration management tool is being replaced with Management Console, which is more encompassing, but different. You have to manually migrate or rebuild any deployed resources from one to the other.

[captn3m0]

QLDB as well.