100% on this, the desire for Web Services branded as SOA, or an IT strategy based around SOA technologies is a regular occurance right now in IT. This is why I keep banging on about Business Service architectures and realising the what the business services are and their actual value. The odds on a technology driven SOA delivering business benefits is about the same as EAI.
That isn't to say that SOA is wrong as a concept, but that the current approaches are driven by vendors with a desire to sell more shiny software. On 26/11/06, Mike Glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
More importantly, if we don't really know what SOA is, how do we know that it's a good idea? Or that it's actually better than any other approach? One of the common factors in the various industry definitions of SOA I see is a long list of unsubstantiated claims for the benefits such as how it will make your business more agile, reduce costs and so on. But what I am still missing is a proper reasoned argument as to exactly *how* SOA (and only SOA) realises these business benefits. This is, in my view perhaps the single most important attribute of any architecture definition. In my work in this area, I struggle to see how what many people call SOA actually delivers the stated business benefits. Conversely, if you look at how really to achieve those benefits, you end up with a very different kind of architecture! -Mike. --- In [email protected]<service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com>, "Gervas Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No one anywhere in the known universe has yet come up with a > definition of SOA which commands widespread acceptance. Perhaps it is > time we had another crack at it. > > Over to you ladies and gents... > > Gervas >
