They subject us to meet with them as customers on Chime. This is despite everyone hating the product. CodeCommit was annoying because nobody uses it, and you had to touch adjacent projects like CodeStar to do something like trigger on a GitHub commit.

> Also they have a dumb rule to dog food everything

This is false. Otherwise I'd be interested in any reliable sources.

As far as I can tell this is some sort of urban myth since AWS first stepped onto the scene.

I believe it's based on Steve Yegge's original microservices rant: https://gist.github.com/chitchcock/1281611

I don't think that's myth, though I've heard it criticized variously as outdated, or just one person's take.

There's nothing in Yegge's rant that implies Amazon must dog food AWS. AWS as we know it, was, if anything, a byproduct of the efforts described by the rant.

Amazon certainly uses AWS but I think it's foolish to think they use every product (they obviously do not) nor that they must. For the foundational pieces -- EC2, SNS, S3 -- sure, of course. They spent a long time migrating workloads.

I don't expect that with every new service they launch that they have already widely adopted it by then. Maybe after their customers widely adopt it, if ever.

> There's nothing in Yegge's rant that implies Amazon must dog food AWS

Really? From the link:

> "The Golden Rule of platforms is that you Eat Your Own Dogfood."

and from Yegge's interpretation of Bezos' mandate:

> "All [mandated internal APIs to be used for all interservice communication], without exception, must be designed from the ground up to be externalizable. That is to say, the team must plan and design to be able to expose the interface to developers in the outside world. No exceptions."

Of course Amazon doesn't necessarily use every single AWS feature internally; I don't think dogfooding implies building all your features for internal customers first, and then selling them. Rather, it implies refraining from selling crappy reimplementations/duplications of internal tools.