I beg to differ. Switching from what most people have done in the past requires *more*, not *less* skill and resources. I believe it's worth it, but it's definitely not a case of "worse is better".
Stefan -- Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/ On Nov 22, 2007, at 2:21 PM, JP Morgenthal wrote: > This is not a surprising. > > > CORBA was beyond the reach of so many because of it's power and > complexity, so we backed off. > Knowledge management was beyond the reach of so many because of it's > power and complexity, so we backed off. > SOA is beyond the reach of so many because of it's power and > complexity....well, we can all see where this is going. > > in my opinion, this is a resource issue. To succeed, these > initiatives require availability of knowledgeable resources and in > each case the level of complexity has made it difficult to build > enough momentum for any one of these avenues. > > In each case, we backed off to a more simple approach. In one > conference I used the "rats in the sewer" analogy, which made the > press at the time. I will reiterate it here for the entertainment > value. > > The distributed computing industry is akin to a group of rats in the > sewer. They run through their sewer pipes making connections and > building communities. Eventually, one rat becomes more intelligent > than the other rats and attempts to move up to a higher level where > the food is fresher and more abundant. So, they find their way up a > pipe to ground level only to end up in the middle of the street > swarmed by fast moving cars or people, and in their fear they > retrench back to the sewer where it's nice and safe. > > Every few years our industry comes up with a compelling approach > toward agility and minimizing the efforts to develop and maintain > software-based systems that have tremendous power, but since the > industry cannot deliver enough resources quickly enough we retrench > to our well-known approaches. Can anyone see WOA in this statement? > > JP > __________________________________ > JP Morgenthal > President & CEO > Avorcor, Inc. > 46440 Benedict Drive > Suite 103 > Sterling, VA 20164 > (703) 649-0829 x 101: Office > (703) 554-5301 : Cell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________ > > Confidential: The information in this e-mail message (including any > attachments) is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named > above and as such is privileged and confidential. If you are not an > intended recipient of this message or an agent responsible for > delivering it to the intended recipient(s), be hereby notified that > you have received this message in error. Any review, dissemination, > distribution, printing or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you believe you have received this message in error, > please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete > this message from your system(s). > > > > > On Nov 22, 2007, at 5:29 AM, ironick wrote: > >> WOA is what SOA should have been...and can still become. >> >> >> >> >> Sent to you by ironick via Google Reader: >> >> >> SOA is ovah?! >> via Web Oriented Architecture blog by William Rice on 11/9/07 >> >> Is the SOA story over? >> By Wesley in der Maur, William Rice, Ernst Siegert >> >> For years we have been talking about SOA, and some of us have even >> been implementing it. Or at least trying to do so. In practice, SOA >> appears to be failing to deliver on its promises. Why is this? Have >> we all been fooled by a flawed concept? >> >> We don?t think so. >> >> The concept is ok, and when properly implemented a Service Oriented >> Architecture should be able to provide the benefits of cost >> reduction, short time to market, flexibility etc. The problem is >> not with the concept, but with the execution! To successfully >> implement a SOA, organizations need to really go for this ? no >> holding back. To get this kind of commitment, the desire has to >> come from within the business units and must not be another example >> of ?IT driving the business?. Such has been the case with SOA, we >> might say. >> >> To successfully deliver the concept and promises of SOA, a new kid >> on the block appears to be coming to the rescue. This is the >> concept of WOA ? Web Oriented Architecture. >> >> One definition (from Gartner) of Web Oriented Architecture: an >> architectural style that is a substyle of SOA based on the >> architecture of the WWW with the following additional constraints: >> globally linked, decentralized, and uniform intermediary processing >> of application state via self-describing messages. >> >> A few statements from the blogosphere further explaining the >> concept of WOA: >> - Web-Oriented Architecture (WOA) may emerge as a ?lightweight >> version of SOA? - Gartner?s Nick Gall >> - Dion Hinchcliffe?s WOA vision: ?the SOA with reach? >> - Pragmatic Service-Oriented Architecture: Introducing the WOA/ >> Client (Architecture Journal) >> >> Examples are to be seen everywhere. More and more companies are >> beginning to provide (sell) and integrate web services as offered >> over the internet in to their applications. Internet applications, >> used primarily for customer interaction at the moment, but also >> supporting internal business functions, such as Salesforce.com does >> for CRM processes. >> Other examples from our own experience are large insurance >> companies integrating a State-provided vehicle information service >> in their car insurance web applications and a large publishing >> company delivering functionality with integrated content as >> services for customers to integrate in their own portals. >> >> These examples show us the cost benefits of Web Oriented >> Architecture ? designing by ?mashing up? ? and the fact that it >> delivers new sources of income for companies. >> >> So, WOA is positioned as a subset of SOA, a ?lightweight? version. >> Lightweight because one makes use of what is already ?out there?: >> the architecture of the World Wide Web. Technology is proven, known >> and used by everyone. This means low risk, high interoperability >> and quick and easy to implement. And, most importantly, the >> business is acquainted with it. They already have been using it in >> everyday for many years now. So why not use it for the enterprise? >> >> Conclusion: with WOA paving the way by quickly showing successes >> and expanding the reach, the SOA concept will prove valid and its >> value. WOA is what SOA should have been. >> >> Please let us know what you think by commenting on this post. >> >> >> >> >> Things you can do from here: >> • Subscribe to Web Oriented Architecture blog using Google Reader >> • Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your >> favorite sites >> >> >> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> 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/
