Starting with a disclaimer -- I work at Microsoft, but way down below SOA in the technology stack. I don't have any day job insightor authority on this ...
Have you read the MS position paper http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/BTS_2004WP/html/47850cbd-63ed-4370-a467-6bd320636902.asp from last August? That's about the closest thing I know of to what you are asking for. I'd also point you to the blog entry http://blogs.msdn.com/richardt/archive/2005/12/05/500282.aspx discussing some of the feedback from this. I will say that this statement rings true for me: "Every time the IT industry coins a new term customers get confused and concerned that they've been doing things wrong in the past. All too often, vendors define these new terms as brand new ways of approaching/solving a given problem. These new terms rarely actually describe something new as such - they're usually just a refinement of what we've been doing/using in the past. ... " I'd also endorse what Anne said: "Microsoft defines its own path and doesn't like to follow the crowd. Microsoft views SOA as too grandiose, and it is instead focusing on more practical, pragmatic, and tactical issues rather than life-style changing, strategic initiatives like SOA. " That's not to say that some of the pronouncements about software / web services and the .NET platform circa 2001 weren't a bit grandiose :-) On the other hand, I think there has been a growing appreciation here over the past 5 years of how long it takes to change lifestyles and implement grand strategic visions, especially when the paying customers are more interested in getting what they already bought to work. At the risk of being a bit snarky, I'd also point out that many of the folks in the SOA / ESB buzzword bingo game make their living off *professional* services, not software licenses or services that work out of the box. New names for old concepts, or promotion of promising concepts that are not quite ready for prime time in the IT shops of the world, are their bread and butter. That's not how Microsoft makes its bread, for better and for worse. On 3/6/06, Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We read quite a lot in this Group about Java and other non-MS > technologies. And this depite Sun not being over-aggressive about > marketing software, and doing even less for some of its Orphan Java > technologies (how often do they bother to mention Jini, RIO, Jxta etc.??). > > What we don't read or hear much about is what is going on in the > Microsoft SOA universe. I know MS do not do much to push the concept > of SOA, but a lot of SOA implementations take place in .NET > environments. Most big organisations seem to have a mixture of .NET > and Java. So what are MS doing about SOA middleware now that every > platform vendor and his dog is offering an ESB? There is of course > the spectre of Indigo on the horizon, but it is not readily apparent > how this is going to fit into the SOA middleware scene. Do any of you > have any information on this? Come to think of it, why are Sun and > Microsoft so coy about these key aspects of their technology? > > Gervas > > > > > > > > > > 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/
