Its unfortunate that the bricklayer analogy is focused on the front-end user experience. This is, imho, the least interesting part of an architecture. I think one of the biggest challenges is how to expose our services and capabilities to the broadest possible set of consumers, not how the consumers will use them.
I also found the table in the article somewhat misleading. SOA is not just SOAP on servers with a slow rate of change - its also not a centralized architecture (at least not in my experiences anyway). Thanks for scanning and sharing Todd! John > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Eric Newcomer > Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 8:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] eWeek > Comparison of SOA and Web 2.0 > > Todd - thanks very much. > > The text of the article seems ok, although perhaps a > bit disjointed. > > I think the major point is on target though - about > developers doing more and more component assembly and > less development of code from scratch. > > We see a lot of analogies to try to explain what's > happening in the software industry as it continues to > mature, and the bricklayer analogy isn't bad since it > implies the use of standard size bricks to improve > productivity and lower cost (compared to the trouble > of constructing those old stone walls we see a lot of > in New England for example). > > Eric > > --- Todd Biske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I had to split it into two PDFs, since there were > > some ads in the > > middle. > > > > http://www.biske.com/eWeek021306.pdf > > http://www.biske.com/eWeek021306.p2.pdf > > > > -tb > > > > On Feb 17, 2006, at 3:57 PM, JP Morgenthal wrote: > > > > > eWeek has not posted this article online. Does > > anyone have the > > > ability to > > > scan and send to the rest of the group? I may be > > able to, but not > > > until > > > next week. > > > > > > JP > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: > > [email protected] > > > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Behalf > > > Of Eric > > > Newcomer > > > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 3:42 PM > > > To: > > [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] > > eWeek Comparison of > > > SOA and > > > Web 2.0 > > > > > > I haven't seen the article either, although I > > believe this is the > > > one I was > > > interviewed for. If so, I hope my contribution > > seemed ok ;-) > > > > > > Based on the comments I've seen here it sure seems > > like someone has > > > mixed up > > > architecture and technology. > > > I also am with Anne about this what the heck is > > Web 2.0 stuff - I > > > don't > > > like the name but I suppose we are stuck with > > it... > > > > > > What I hope came through though is the need to > > connect the Web 2.0 > > > technologies to enterprise data sources using Web > > services. > > > > > > I have blogged a bit about this, but mostly within > > the overall > > > context of > > > the need to standardize the software industry. > > The Web 2.0 stuff > > > is a great > > > illustration of the benefits of standardization, > > and to me it's a good > > > illustration of the kind of thing the industry > > needs to achive in > > > enterprise > > > software. > > > > > > The importance of standardization to productivity: > > > > > > > > > http://www.iona.com/blogs/newcomer/archives/000255.html > > > > > > Solution through standardization: > > > > > > > > > http://www.iona.com/blogs/newcomer/archives/000258.html > > > > > > How it all ties into Web 2.0: > > > > > > > > > http://www.iona.com/blogs/newcomer/archives/000259.html > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Todd Biske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> There's been a rash of articles on the Web 2.0 > > and SOA due to John > > >> deVaDoss' (Microsoft) recent comments. While I > > just went to the > > >> eWeek site and couldn't find the article, I know > > I saw that table > > >> that > > >> you mentioned and I shook my head as well. If I > > recall correctly, > > >> the > > >> article kept flip-flopping on whether SOA and Web > > 2.0 were > > >> complementary or not, and that table didn't help > > at all. > > >> > > >> It's a shame that the waters were muddied by that > > article, because I > > >> actually think some of the discussion going on > > around SOA and Web 2.0 > > >> is very good. I've been making some notes in > > prep for a blog entry, > > >> but have had some other things to take care of, > > so it's still on the > > >> back burner. I've got strong roots on the user > > side of the world, so > > >> tying SOA concepts back to areas where users have > > to interact with > > >> systems is always interesting for me. > > >> > > >> -tb > > >> > > >> On Feb 15, 2006, at 3:56 PM, JP Morgenthal wrote: > > >> > > >>> Did anyone catch eWeek's horrible article on SOA > > >> and Web 2.0 in the > > >>> 2/13 issue? Am I crazy or is this the stupidest > > >> thing this > > >>> publication ever printed? Their chart comparing > > >> SOA to Web 2.0 is > > >>> downright asinine. They actually listed the > > >> communication > > >>> mechanism for SOA as SOAP and Web 2.0 as REST. > > >> Ummmm, when did > > >>> SOAP become SOA-centric? Or better yet, when > > did > > >> SOA become SOAP- > > >>> centric. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> JP > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> JP Morgenthal > > >>> Managing Partner > > >>> > > >>> <image001.jpg> > > >>> > > >>> <image002.gif> > > >>> > > >>> Work: 703-648-1520 > > >>> > > >>> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> IM: jmorgenthal (Skype) > > >>> <image003.gif> > > >>> Professional Profile > > >>> My Blog > > >>> > > >>> Avorcor, Inc. > > >>> 12110 Sunset Hills Road > > >>> Suite 450 > > >>> Reston, VA 20190 USA > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> See who we know in common > > >>> > > >>> Want a signature like this? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> SPONSORED LINKS > > >>> Computer software Computer aided design software > > >> Computer job > > >>> Soa Service-oriented architecture > > >>> > > >>> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > >>> > > >>> Visit your group > > >> "service-orientated-architecture" on the web. > > >>> > > >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email > > to: > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> > > >>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > > >> Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
