Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Oracle Fusion: The ‘Frankenstein’ of SOA?

Mon, 24 Oct 2005 03:24:21 -0700

All,

One of the problems which is continuing and will still continue is that the committe which creates standard is formed by all these big vendors. So what comes out is a vendor tries (whoever dominates in the committee) to push his product feature to the standard requirement. This has been happening in past many a times. Recently even in EJB specs one can see that they have adopted hibernate style.

Cheers :)
Samir Kumar Mishra
Tel: +61-403-747-809
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home: http://samirmishra.tripod.com/
My Attitude in life is best described by my Blood Group.. B +ve.

On 10/24/05, Raja Mohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
It is interesting discussion but the issue is old.
Every time customer has a challenge of either to buy the best from several vendors or buy an Balanced performing bundled solution from one vendor. Both have advantages as well as disadvantages.
One of the approach from the customer / consultant may be referring to what the neutral market analysts such as Gartner, Forrester and IDC say about the offerings of SOA from various vendors, their approaches and strengths/weaknesses.
Best regards,
Raja Mohan
Radovan Janecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ron,

I hope I understand your point. The question is where is the boundary between 'real product' and 'mish-mash'. In the context of SOA infrastructure discussion you might want see (an ad hoc incomplete list):

1) service runtime
2) security (user management, authentication, authorization, signature or encryption services, trust, federation, firewalls,...)
3) routing (including bpel like routing)
4) reliability
5) management (monitoring, auditing, tools, ...)
6) reporting
7) distributed configuration
8) runtime policy framework
9) _huge_ amount of bridges to legacy world
10) development tools and office tools integration
11) registry (discovery, publishing, taxonomies)
12) repository (interfaces, policies, contracts, etc.)

Now, what the 'SOA product' should offer and when it starts to be mish-mash? I think we both agree it's not about having everything from 1 to 12 (and more). So if a vendor X itself provides 1, 8, 10 because it does it very well and then it integrates with vendor Y that does the best in 2 and 11 - is it a mish-mash or product? Where is the line?

Anyway, no vendor is big or good enough to provide complete SOA solution. This should not be seen as a problem. This always has been the case despite all the promises. But now, SOA allows customers to choose the best of breed security, registry, tools, management - which is very good.

As Anne said, the press communication can be confusing (e.g. the Oracle vs IBM comparison). But it seems we are on the same page now.

Best,
Radovan

On 10/21/05, Ron Schmelzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
Hi Radovan --

You still got it wrong - at least you got it wrong as to what Jason and I meant in our comments. We definitely are not saying to get it all from one vendor. What we are saying is that if you DO buy a product from a vendor, at the very least it should be a real product - not a mish-mash of random stuff. So, we are not saying buy an ESB ./ Service Network etc. from one vendor as the only solution. What we are saying is that if you are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a product, it better be a product!

Does that clarify things? In the future, we'd be happy to chat directly, since getting it wrong doesn't really do a service to either our original comments or your blog commentary... If you're not clear about what we meant in our comments, we're happy to clarify.

Ron


Radovan Janecek wrote:
Ron,

thanks for your answer. I cannot comment Oracle's strategy as I don't know enough. My general 2 cents are here:

http://radovanjanecek.net/blog/archives/000289.html

Best,
Radovan

On 10/20/05, Ron Schmelzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
To answer your question on the blog, the opinion is not that companies shouldn't approach SOA as a frankestein of multiple products (in fact, this is actually a BEST practice). Jason and I believe that Oracle's approach itself is a Frankstein. What this means is that as a company, the company has no single strategy with SOA. Rather than come up with one strategy, they are cobbling together many disparate and unrelated technologies in hopes that it is consistent.

For customer to build their own Frankenstein is one thing (and actually a good thing)
For companies who have SOA products to build a Frankenstein and then give it to their customers pretending that it's a single product is another thing (and a bad thing).

I hope this clarifies our comments.
Ron


Radovan Janecek wrote:
Robin, I agree with you and I'm very surprised by that article. My comment is on my blog:

http://radovanjanecek.net/blog/archives/000287.html

Best,
Radovan

On 10/19/05, Robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jason Bloomberg has been telling to SD Times that Oracle is taking the
Frankenstein approach to SOA. Check the article here
http://www.sdtimes.com/article/story-20051015-09.html

I am surprized to see no reaction to this statement. I believe every
architect busy integrating packages or best-of-breed products is taking
the Frankenstein approach.

I think IBM and BEA have also a long track of such integrations.

I am also convinced that SOA role is to make the Frankenstein Approach
possible or at least less expensive at the end of the day.

What do you think?

Robin








SPONSORED LINKS
Service-oriented architecture Computer monitoring software Computer and internet software
Free computer monitoring software

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS





--
Radovan Janecek
http://radovanjanecek.net/blog 

-- 
_____________________________________________________________
Ronald Schmelzer


[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Analyst
ZapThink LLC
Direct: 781-577-2779 / Main: 781-207-0203


SPONSORED LINKS
Service-oriented architecture Computer monitoring software Computer and internet software
Free computer monitoring software

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS





--
Radovan Janecek
http://radovanjanecek.net/blog



SPONSORED LINKS
Service-oriented architecture Computer monitoring software Free computer monitoring software

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to