--- In [email protected], Steve Ross-Talbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steven,
Perhaps there is some misunderstanding here: I don't know anyone who would contend that inertia and sticking to the status quo would lead to innovation and out-of-the-box thinking! I do however think that when dealing with customers one should be very much aware of the these factors and the customer's perspective in general. This does not of course preclude one's efforts to overcome these barriers and propose a novel solution. In my experience one is far more likely to succeed in this aim if one respects the customer's perspective and above all is seen to respect it! Gervas > > On 8 Apr 2006, at 11:14, Gervas Douglas wrote: > > > Thanks, Anne - I would not have known how to begin to approach those > > technical points as you well know. > > > > Gregg, in whatever commercial work I do, I tend to have contact with a > > lot of people and a lot of companies, sometimes from cold with no > > minimal preconceptions on my part. This forces me to look at things > > from the customer's point of you. To use my own hackeyed expression > > "I put myself behind the user's eyeballs." BTW I then look outwards! > > However objective one's arguments appear you can never ignore > > subjective perceptions when it comes to decision-making. > > > > As Anne, who also has a lot of customer contact, says, politics > > happen. It is not just a matter of relations between colleagues. > > People tend to like what they know and can understand and master. > > Your technical arguments might seem unassailable to you as an > > experienced engineer. However, like it or not, not everyone will be > > convinced to adopt your recommendations, partly because the merits of > > the latter notwithstanding, they want to avoid the consequent > > disruption of their environment which is as it is for better or worse > > because of past decisions. The inertia of the status quo in terms of > > operating environments, existing skills, available support, need for > > training, relationships with influential suppliers (e.g. Microsoft), > > the comfort that comes with familiarity etc. should never be > > underestimated. > > One might assert that politics of this nature happen because we as > architects > and we as analysts allow it to happen. `i don't buy intertia it does > not lead to > innovation and out-of-the-box thinking. I am sure that better > architectures than > those proffered by large vendors will come to the fore and some will be > seen to > have helped this and some will be laggards. This is just the cycle of > culteral > lockin and innovation that has always occurred. > > So I guess I agree with Dan but I also understand Anne's point of view > even if > I don't agree with the status-quo in terms of innovation that it alas > promotes. > > > > > One of the ways Java advocates sometimes arouse resentment is by being > > perceived as trying to impose their language and environment, and only > > theirs, on others, however distorted that perception may be. A > > corollary of course is when MS advocates are seen to impose Windows > > and .NET to the exclusion of other platforms on others. > > > > When one is recommending what seems unassailably correct, its > > rejection might seem desperately unfair and illogical - that is the > > reality of human nature that commercial people have to deal with every > > day. > > > > Gervas > > > > --- In [email protected], "Anne Thomas > > Manes" <atmanes@> wrote: > > > > > > Gregg, > > > > > > Unfortunately, the market frequently isn't especially concerned > > with the > > > best technical solution. Politics happen. > > > > > > I know the JERI enables interoperability with non-Java > > environments, but > > > Jini/JS still has a hard dependency on Java, and that will always > > cause > > > political resistence, limiting its potential adoption rates. > > > > > > btw -- this comment isn't quite accurate: > > > > > > "In WS-* applications the conversion from native data types to SOAP > > or some > > > other wire or invocation layer representation is done smack in the > > middle of > > > the application. What difference does it make where that > > conversion is > > > done?" > > > > > > Typically when using a SOAP framework, such as .NET, Apache Axis, > > WebSphere, > > > WebLogic, SAP NetWeaver, SOAP:Lite, PEAR SOAP, Ruby SOAP, etc, the > > > application doesn't need to perform conversions from native types to > > XML. > > > The conversions are performed automatically by the middleware. In > > the Java > > > toolkits, a service is implemented as a POJO, and clients simply > > invoke > > > operations on proxy objects. It feels very much like RMI, although > > it's a > > > document exchange system rather than a distributed object system. > > Developers > > > should be aware of that subtle distinction (although many aren't -- > > leading > > > to a variety of bad practices). > > > > > > Anne > > > > > > On 4/8/06, Gregg Wonderly <gergg@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Gervas Douglas wrote: > > > > > Yes, Gregg, but like it or not, there are some people who do not > > want > > > > > to use Java. I believe some of them work in a town called > > Redmond. I > > > > > guess that it is as much a political issue as a technical one. > > > > > > > > Right, but how would one make another Linda implementation that > > swallowed > > > > XML > > > > directly, any less controversial :-) At some point it would be > > written in > > > > some > > > > language with some features associated with the transport of data > > into and > > > > out > > > > of it. Those features would either be enabling or confining for a > > > > specific set > > > > of use cases involving other languages/platforms. So what would > > be the > > > > advantage? > > > > > > > > I know I am arguing technically about a political point. I'm just > > trying > > > > to > > > > push hard enough to get more than an emotional response from those > > that > > > > want to > > > > argue about the political points of Java and Jini. > > > > > > > > If we could all just get to the technical issues... My feet are > > not > > > > feeling any > > > > colder though, so we probably still have a ways to go... > > > > > > > > Gregg Wonderly > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > 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/
