I've heard others say Service Broker as well. I think this is because Microsoft, most bloggers, tutorials, etc try to present way too much SB content without a quick and dirty example. For instance, message types and contracts give noobs problems. But, like foreign key constraints, they aren't even needed. Just avoid them for the first few demos then demo how these things help you avoid errors.

Also, people not familiar with MSMQ or JMS, etc, get hung up on the concept of the "dialog" pattern and don't understand how a sender can do something asynchronously, yet still need to end the convo later. Huh? This is because most people (IMHO) really want to use Service Broker as fire-and-forget. There are safe ways to implement this pattern that are far less confusing for people.