I'm a bit confused too. Is it possible to imagine a T-SOA project that has a sound (realizable) business case?
Or is any SOA project with a sound business case necessarily B-SOA? Rgds Ashley Steve Jones wrote: > > I have to say I completely disagree, from my definition of T-SOA (Web > Services/BPEL/vendors/etc). > > Changing the way you think about systems is the most effective way to > change the way you implement them. Whether that uses new technologies > or not is irrelevant (or at best semi-relevant). Business change > programmes do not require new technologies and indeed are often best > done when the technologies remain effectively the same but the context > and application of those technologies changes. > > For me B-SOA is absolutely about the realisation of the solution, it > is exactly that which drives it, which drives the governance and which > drives the organisation and methods for delivery. T-SOA is just the > plumbing. > > So this either means that > > a) I completely disagree > > or > > b) You are including technical delivery methods (people, process, > commercials) within T-SOA which isn't where I'd put that stuff. > > B-SOA absolutely could just be BS if it was just about the powerpoint > pictures and then waving hands between there and reality. My > experience however is that its the Business Services (the BS if you > will) that actually drives the delivery and puts T-SOA where it > belongs... in a technology box. > > Steve > > 2008/11/15 Nick Gall <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:nick.gall%40gmail.com>>: > > 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/ > <http://ironick.typepad.com/ironick/> > > Furl: http://www.furl.net/members/ngall > <http://www.furl.net/members/ngall> > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Steve Jones > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:jones.steveg%40gmail.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 > > > > > >
