Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS CloudFormation vs Atom: What are the differences?
Key Differences between AWS CloudFormation and Atom
1. Templating Language: AWS CloudFormation uses AWS CloudFormation Templates (CFT), which are written in JSON or YAML format. These templates define the resources and their configurations that need to be provisioned in an AWS environment. On the other hand, Atom is a highly customizable text editor that supports various programming languages and offers a wide range of features and packages for developers.
2. Purpose: AWS CloudFormation is specifically designed for infrastructure as code (IaC), allowing users to automate the management and provisioning of AWS resources. Atom, on the other hand, is primarily used as a general-purpose text editor for coding, supporting a wide range of programming languages and offering extensive customization options.
3. Cloud Environment: AWS CloudFormation is tightly integrated with AWS services and allows users to provision, update, and manage resources in the AWS cloud environment. Atom, on the other hand, is not limited to any specific cloud environment and can be used for coding in various environments and platforms.
4. Collaboration and Version Control: AWS CloudFormation provides built-in collaboration features, such as sharing templates and stacks, and integration with version control systems like AWS CodeCommit. Atom also supports collaboration and version control through plugins and integrations with popular platforms like GitHub.
5. Deployment and Orchestration: AWS CloudFormation enables users to deploy and orchestrate complex applications and infrastructure using a declarative approach, specifying the desired end state. Atom, being a text editor, does not have built-in deployment or orchestration capabilities and relies on external tools or scripts for these purposes.
6. Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) Integration: AWS CloudFormation has native integrations with CI/CD tools like AWS CodePipeline, allowing for seamless integration of infrastructure changes into existing development workflows. Atom, as a standalone text editor, does not have native CI/CD integrations and requires additional configuration and tooling for CI/CD workflows.
In summary, AWS CloudFormation is a specialized service for infrastructure as code and cloud resource provisioning, while Atom is a versatile text editor with extensive customization options for coding purposes. CloudFormation is tightly integrated with AWS services and supports deployment and orchestration, collaboration, and version control in the AWS cloud environment, whereas Atom is not limited to any specific cloud environment and requires additional tooling for similar functionalities.
Ok, so first - AWS Copilot is CloudFormation under the hood, but the way it works results in you not thinking about CFN anymore. AWS found the right balance with Copilot - it's insanely simple to setup production-ready multi-account environment with many services inside, with CI/CD out of the box etc etc. It's pretty new, but even now it was enough to launch Transcripto, which uses may be a dozen of different AWS services, all bound together by Copilot.
Since communication with Github is not necessary, the Atom is less convenient in working with text and code. Sublim's support and understanding of projects is best for us. Notepad for us is a completely outdated solution with an unacceptable interface. We use a good theme for Sublim ayu-dark
Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.
We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.
Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.
AdvantagesTerraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.
Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.
Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.
DisadvantagesSoftware is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.
Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.
Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.
I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:
- I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
- I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
- I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.
I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:
- It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
- It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
- It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
- It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
Pros of Atom
- Free529
- Open source449
- Modular design343
- Hackable321
- Beautiful UI316
- Backed by github147
- Built with node.js119
- Web native113
- Community107
- Packages35
- Cross platform18
- Nice UI5
- Multicursor support5
- TypeScript editor5
- Open source, lots of packages, and so configurable3
- cli start3
- Simple but powerful3
- Chrome Inspector works IN EDITOR3
- Snippets3
- Code readability2
- It's powerful2
- Awesome2
- Smart TypeScript code completion2
- Well documented2
- works with GitLab1
- "Free", "Hackable", "Open Source", The Awesomness1
- full support1
- vim support1
- Split-Tab Layout1
- Apm publish minor1
- Consistent UI on all platforms1
- User friendly1
- Hackable and Open Source1
- Publish0
Pros of AWS CloudFormation
- Automates infrastructure deployments43
- Declarative infrastructure and deployment21
- No more clicking around13
- Any Operative System you want3
- Atomic3
- Infrastructure as code3
- CDK makes it truly infrastructure-as-code1
- Automates Infrastructure Deployment1
- K8s0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Atom
- Slow with large files19
- Slow startup7
- Most of the time packages are hard to find.2
- No longer maintained1
- Cannot Run code with F51
- Can be easily Modified1
Cons of AWS CloudFormation
- Brittle4
- No RBAC and policies in templates2