It dpends... If you invest into heater and cannot heat the house is significantly different from investing in house. In the last case, you will be able to invest into the heater as well but in the relationship with other things like "termo"-isolation of the ceiling and windows, and so on.
The assumption is that B-SOA will have no choice than to promote T-SOA but for the real needs, not for the IT fantasies and guesses of how the business really works. - Michael ________________________________ From: Nick Gall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 3:27:19 PM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Business SOA B-SOA (without T-SOA) == BS-OA just as much as T-SOA without B-SOA == BS-OA In other words, a free floating set of new biz concepts (B-SOA) without some new concepts for realizing them (T-SOA) is just BS. And some new concepts for realization (T-SOA) without new guiding biz concepts is just a different kind of BS. -- Nick Nick Gall Phone: +1.781.608.5871 AOL IM: Nicholas Gall Yahoo IM: nick_gall_1117 MSN IM: (same as email) Google Talk: (same as email) Email: nick.gall AT-SIGN gmail DOT com Weblog: http://ironick. typepad.com/ ironick/ Furl: http://www.furl. net/members/ ngall On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Steve Jones <jones.steveg@ gmail.com> wrote: Reading some things about SOA recently and speaking with clients I'm getting a consistent feedback that T-SOA is being seen as a failure and that companies are looking more and more at a B-SOA approach as being the right way and driving change through structural, organisational and governance with technology being part of the story. Now clearly I'm HUGELY biased because its what I've been campaigning for years, but are others seeing this as well? Steve
