Slashdot Mirror


Beyond Software Architecture

jkauzlar writes "When thinking about a software product's architecture there are two viewpoints to consider: the marketecture (or the marketing architecture) and the tarchitecture (the technical architecture). Oftentimes an architecture is designed without consideration of the market toward which the product is directed and even a technically superior product can fail against competitors with an inferior product, but who understand the market a lot better." This book tries to remind programmers (and managers) about maintaining the right balance of these things; read on for the rest of jkauzlar's review. Beyond Software Architecture author Luke Hohmann pages 314 publisher Addison-Welsey rating 5 out of 5 reviewer Joe Kauzlarich ISBN 0201775948 summary A software architect's guide to designing software with the market and end-user in mind

Overview Beyond Software Architecture explains how to bridge the gap between the marketecture and tarchitecture- how to create a product that not only performs well, but which also appeals to the market. It is part of the Addison-Wesley Professional Series line of books (also containing notable titles like Design Patterns, Refactoring, and Patterns of Enterprise Architecture) but this latest installment in the series is (thankfully) paperback, so it comes at a paperback price ($39.99 USD).

I am a software developer with no marketing background who works in small development teams, usually in an open-source development atmosphere. I was excited to find this book because it told me what I need to consider for my projects to help them reach the intended user. There is a lot of helpful information in this book, and at times it almost seems to suggest more work than I can handle, but I think it will ultimately pay off to be able to use the knowledge gained.

Table of Contents Forwards by Martin Fowler and Guy Kawasaki
1. Software Architecture
2. Product Development Primer
3. The Difference between Marketecture and Tarchitecture
4. Business and License Model Symbiosis
5. Technology In-Licensing
6. Portability
7. Deployment Architecture
8. Integration and Extension
9. Brand and Brand Elements
10. Usability
11. Installation
12. Upgrade
13. Configuration
14. Logs
15. Release Management
16. Security
Appendix A. Release Checklist
Appendix B. A Pattern Language for Strategic Product Management

Organization by chapter: Chapters 1-3 set up the rest of the book, defining the scope of the book as well as concepts and key terms used throughout the book. They describe a product development cycle, the players involved, etc.

The remaining chapters each focus on a particular aspect of a software product and how it relates to both the customer and the product's architecture. Catalogs of alternatives are available for each topic along with caveats for each alternative.

For example, in Chapter 6, "Portability," the advantages and disadvantages of creating a portable application are discussed. If most of your customers are using Windows and your code is written in C++, then the cost of supporting Solaris as well may be the difference between a product's financial success and failure. The chapter reminds us that guaranteeing support for 6 operating systems and 4 database backends and 3 browsers means that we have to support and provide quality assurance for 6x4x3=72 combinations of products. Then it describes a process of eliminating or prioritizing combinations of platform support. The chapter goes on to describe ways in which a product's architecture can affect its portability and how best to write software to be portable.

Related to this is a discussion of how supporting particular platforms ties your release cycles into the release cycles of products you support-- another problem that can financially doom a project. Another point from Chapter 6 that I found interesting was what it means to support a platform-- the customer expects you to take advantage of the platform's features. Many cross-platform products are written to be identical on each platform they support, which means they probably ignore platform dependent libraries or features that can enhance performance or usability. This creates a potential place where competitors can gain an edge.

So you see each chapter goes into great length and detail to cover the nuances of its topic, and it is extensive enough that it can be overwhelming and even discouraging.

Who should read this book Anyone involved in software architecture or design, particularly project managers, whether in a very small group or a large corporate atmosphere. Open source developers are notoriously technically proficient, and often are not marketing-savvy. Oftentimes you have to be technically proficient to even install and use an open-source product. Ordinary developers who do not participate in architecture might benefit from reading this book in order to understand the decisions being made by the architects.

Why someone should read this book Many software industry professionals are not marketing experts and may even view the marketing department as their enemy. This book helps bridge that gap between marketing and project management, helping the two parties work together to create more effective, usable, or profitable software. Similarly, open-source developers usually architect and market their own software. Tactics described in this book could help OS developers create software that lasts longer, is more extensible, and more usable.

What this book is and is not. This is a general, and not technology-specific, guide to designing software and while doing so, keeping a marketing perspective in mind. It describes what things a software architect should remember when designing a product.

It is not a guide to marketing software. It does not recommend particular solutions for particular problems. It does not tell you what you should do, only what the consequences of your choices may be.

What I would like to see A similar book that concentrates on the open-source aspects of the topics included in this book and how and how not to use open source tools (like Freshmeat, Sourceforge, Bugzilla, CVS) for marketing and maintaining successful open-source projects.

Recommendation Buy this book if you have benefited from Design Patterns, Refactoring or Patterns of Enterprise Architecture. This book is a welcome addition to a line of books that has consistently contributed to the standard knowledge base of the software architecture discipline.

You can purchase Beyond Software Architecture from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

38 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Marketing for Developers by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Developers shouldn't care about the market. If you have a quality process in place with requirements that are reviewed by many disciplines (services, product management, etc) then they will modify the product to fit the market.

    If you don't have that well.. how much quality will you have anyway whether you get this book or not? ;)

    --
    --------
    Free your mind.
    1. Re:Marketing for Developers by C0deJunkie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I disagree. If developers (and analysts, project mgr's etc..) do nothing to care about the market (read: at least make the product easy to change/adapt) then the best thing that could happen is a lot of money spent to match user/market requirements.

    2. Re:Marketing for Developers by Trigun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You still have to find a balance. If you're modifying your product to fit every slight change in the market, then you're too far behind.

      Successful developers have the market modified to fit its products. Think Cisco.

    3. Re:Marketing for Developers by RandomWhiteMan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Marketing is acctually a big part of ensuring quality processes. All the disciplines ensuring quality need feedback from customers, whether it is the end customer or the company you are supplying. I'm in a position right now setting up a Quality System (granted not for software, but manufactured parts) and it relies heavily on customer feed back on all our processes, not just the quality of our product. I started assuming I wouldn't interact with marketing at all, and now it's become a large focus.

    4. Re:Marketing for Developers by Jack+William+Bell · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bullcrap!

      Developers should care very much about the market, for a variety of reasons. Not the least of which is the fact that the people who's job it is to do that may not have enough knowledge breadth to also understand the technical aspects, and how they are affected by market-based descisions. If you want your voice to be heard in these discussions you have to make certain you are talking in a language they understand.

      Of course if you are content to let marketeers and product managers design your product and build your feature list, and then set your schedule without reference to the technical realities, you might think differently. You might also be working for Microsoft...

      --
      - -
      Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
    5. Re:Marketing for Developers by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, the planning phase of a project should identify the business case that the product will play in and the potential for revenue that the product will generate.

      If you dominate the market or have a monopoly, you can pretty much cram whatever you want down the throat of your customers.

      Back in the 80s, AT&T decided what phone features you got, they were the market so they could do whatever they want. Today Cisco has some leeway in that area, but there are still other vendors who have some nice innovations that Cisco will then adopt as well. Or Cisco will drive the market and other vendors will reproduce their features, or improve upon them. Such is the glory of competition.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
    6. Re:Marketing for Developers by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The product manager should state the high level features that the market is demanding. It is then up to the development community, and more specifically a systems engineer or lead developer, to translate those marketing requirements into technical requirements. Customers want to do task A, so that means we need GUI X, and server component Y to let them do A.

      The person who actually sits down and writes the code for X and Y doesn't really need to know a lot about A, or be an expert in the market for A, as long as the requirements have been fully specified for X and Y.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
    7. Re:Marketing for Developers by C0deJunkie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ok, in that way I can see your point, and I completely agree with it.
      My point is that the "key source" is just a part of a project goal. Depending on the market you are dealing with you will try to adapt something of your coding habits (eventually based on analysts directions).

    8. Re:Marketing for Developers by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depending on the organization size, the requirements for a product usually take a few levels:

      - Market requirements
      - General Technical Product Requirements
      - Feature Requirements

      I wouldn't expect a developer to get involve at all in the first, a little in the second, and key on the third to say if it is doable or not in the time frame for the project. And of course the product manager (who understands the market) is a required reviewer of all three.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
    9. Re:Marketing for Developers by Shoeman · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I completely agree, not that it matters, but so would Mr.Humprey, DeMarco, Weinberg, and other legends in the software industry.

      If your developers are detacthed from the end result of the "want" or "need" their work is trying to satisfy then they are incapable of making good business decisions. They become "code monkeys".

      I prefer my staff of developers to think of themselves as entrepreneurial craftsmen. The combination of shrewed businessmen and artfull solutions providers.

    10. Re:Marketing for Developers by FreshFunk510 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes and no.

      If you have too many leaders in one room trying to design a software product you're bound to never get anythign done.

      I'd like to take an Ayn Rand position on it. I'd say that most developers do NOT need to know much about marketing except for the lead developers and architects who should be interacting WITH the marketing fellows to create a product that's both sound in architecture and marketing.

      All the other developers that work underneath this technical leads don't need to be any wiser. That's what leaders are for.

      --


      "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
    11. Re:Marketing for Developers by russellh · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Developers shouldn't care about the market. If you have a quality process in place with requirements that are reviewed by many disciplines (services, product management, etc) then they will modify the product to fit the market.

      That's a big if ! But you know, we're not talking about developers, we're talking about software architects. They're not usually interchangeable. Architects need to know a little bit of everything. In particular, seemingly minor points like supporting platform-specific features are often overlooked at the strategic level.

      --
      must... stay... awake...
    12. Re:Marketing for Developers by spybreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, generally that would be the job of the business analyst or requirements engineer. It's not good practice to 'state' requirements, generally they are obtained by following a well-defined requirements discovery process, such as RUP.

      The product manager's role to is manage the overall strategy and provide the overall interface between all stakeholders of the product.

      In my company only people who know about X and Y, but not A are usually individual test engineers, who genuinely don't have to. And even then it never hurts if they do.

    13. Re:Marketing for Developers by bladernr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is, the requirements are rarely fully specified. It today's time-to-market and features-are-better-than-quality driven world, development - both for products and corporate IT - is very often expected to take off and work with incomplete requirements.

      That is why developers that understand the target use-case and market are so valuable. They can fill in the gaps to make sure of product quality and fitness for purpose. No, its not the ideal situation, but it is reality.

      I've never seen product management FULLY specify integrated, consistent logging and a unified configuration & management interface, but good developers know it is required. Developers with business knowledge of the target application can really help flesh out requirements and provide some sanity.

      It is obviously possible to hire just "pure developers" without domain knowledge, but, in my personal experience, the results are better with developers with specialized business knowledge (but they are harder to come by, and more expensive, so some companies settle for less).

      Developers with business knowledge also make the development process cheaper and faster overall, because fully-specified requirements simply aren't needed. This reduces cost (all of those hours of writing requirements and training developers) and time to market.

      As soon as customers start putting more emphasis on quality than time & money, then these realities will change. But, until that happens (if ever, I don't think it will), those developers who are focused on the market will continue to be the most valuable contributors.

      --
      Sarcasm and hyperbole are the final refuges for weak minds
    14. Re:Marketing for Developers by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>Successful developers have the market modified to fit its products. Think Cisco.

      Strangely enough this also applies to Microsoft.

      --
      Huh?
  2. If you've ever used the words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..."marketecture" or "tarchitecture" in written or verbal form, please kill yourself now.

    I'm off to the suicide booth to pay for my sins.

  3. since we're making up words... by yorkrj · · Score: 5, Funny

    Don't forget to consider the implementation of the buggytechture of your applications. It is important to give your users a reason to buy the next version.

  4. Architecting? by nekoniku · · Score: 3, Funny

    Gee, verbed nouns sure are popularing! Sometimes I think it's almost as bad a habit as l33t sp33k...

    --
    "It's a wonderful idea. But it doesn't work." -- Tad Danielewski
  5. Re:Nice verbing by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Since buzzword-speak became the lingua franca of the tech world (so we're talking at least 5 years now).

    Now if you'll excuse me, my toilet is leaking so I have to do some plumbering and a light bulb burned out and it needs electricianing.

    --

    From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

  6. Really, now. by inertia187 · · Score: 4, Funny

    marketecture...tarchitecture

    They forgot bamboozlecture (or the bamboozle architecture). It's how authors bamboozle you into buying books about made up words.

    Then there's karmarchitecture (or the karma architecture). It's the method by which karma whores read as little of the article as possible and come up with a comment that seems to have something to do with the post but really is just a cheap shot at gathering as much karma as possible.

    --
    A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
    1. Re:Really, now. by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 3, Funny

      I got my BS is karmatechture... you ignorant clod :)

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    2. Re:Really, now. by TwistedGreen · · Score: 2, Funny
      But... it's innovative! Don't you just love how it rolls off of the tongue?
      marketecture

      tarchitecture
      Yum!

      ...*gag*
  7. How this concept REALLY works by beavis88 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) Sales/marketing talk to some clients, find out what they want.

    2) Sales/marketing sign up clients for the beta.

    3) Sales/marketing finally gets around to communicating to the dev team what they have promised the clients.

    4) Sales/marketing blames the developers when they can't deliver what the client was promised.

    This is actually not a joke. On one of that last projects I worked on, I was handed the "specification", which was basically a collection of photoshop mockups, and told that clients were going to be beta testing in 30 days....wheee!

    1. Re:How this concept REALLY works by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1) Sales/marketing talk to some clients, convince them we can give them what they want

      2) Developer talks to clients, determines what they need

      3) Developer talks to Sales/marketing, tells them what the client needs

      4) Sales/marketing talks to clients, sells them on what they need

      5) Developer builds what client needs

      6) Everybody Profits!

      If you are caught in the parent posts situation, insert:

      3.5) Developers firmly tell sales/marketing no and why not, cc owner

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    2. Re:How this concept REALLY works by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most developers roll over for new features 10x quicker than your average salesman

      I think you mean bad developers roll over.

      Salespeople are all about saying yes. They are motivated by their contracts to say anything so they can get a signature and a commission. Once the job is signed, it's not their problem anymore.

      Developers, assuming they are interested in completing the project successfully and not dragging it out to keep the paychecks coming, will be motivated to make their requirements clear and realistic.

      At any rate, the developer shouldn't actually present the pitch to the client. They should develop the requirements document, and leave the selling of it to the pros.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    3. Re:How this concept REALLY works by Arandir · · Score: 2, Funny

      You've got it way too complicated. Here's how it works.

      1) Microsoft saleman visits the medical company.

      2) CEO tells engineers to use Windows XP for our hard realtime embedded system controlling an intracardiac catheter.

      This is actually not a joke. I'm as serious as a cardiac infarction.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  8. Developers MUST know the market by tjstork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The top down hand requirements to developers process is conceptually the same as the top down hand work orders to factory people process that GM used to produce many of its illconceived cars in the 1970s and 1980s.

    Developers MUST know the marketplace because capturing all of the market knowledge into a requirements slows down business mobility too much to make it a worthwhile process.

    Besides, if developers know the market they are in, then, they have an automatic value add over requirements only shops that work overseas!

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Developers MUST know the market by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think it comes down to the R&D organization size. I know many large enterprise companies do something like this:

      - Market Requirements document authored by the business team, outlines what exactly the market demands to satisfy the customers

      - Technical Product Requirements authored by a systems engineer or lead developer who knows all aspects of the entire product, and specifies the feature areas and general product information to satisfy the market requirements

      - Software or Feature requirements/architecture: usually authored by a systems engineer or architect (not necessarily the guy who writes code) on how those general feature areas work (GUI functionality, discrete features, etc). In theory you should be able to take these specific requirements and hand them to ANY developer with proper coding skills and they should turn it into exactly what is needed.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
  9. Follow-up to book by truth_revealed · · Score: 3, Insightful
  10. Re:"architecting" != English by revery · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just checked http://www.m-w.com and confirmed that Architecting is not, in fact, a real word. For that matter neither is "chunking". Unfortunately, neither is "hork" or "hoark" (as in "That rat-bastard just horked my last twinkie!"). Fortunately, "hosed" is acceptable.

    Unfortunately according to http://www.m-w.com "twinkie" is also not a word. I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that rat-bastard isn't either.

  11. for example... by Petronius · · Score: 2, Funny


    fartchitecture : (noun) an architecture that stinks. Example: [insert most hated OS here...]

    --
    there's no place like ~
  12. What *I'D* like to see by Ridgelift · · Score: 2, Funny

    What I'd like to see is a translation of this book without all the marketspeak. Maybe sales and marketing people need lots of buzzwords to make themselves feel smart, but us technical folk find all that extra verbage a waste of time.

    IMHO :-)

  13. Marketecture... by BitwizeGHC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've heard this neologism before, in much the same sense as "benchmarketing", i.e., a sardonic sense wherein it's implied that marketers without any technical knowledge are the ones designing the product.

    But if my boss ever uses the words "marketecture" or "tarchitecture" straight-facedly, I'm quitting.

    --
    N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
  14. Software Contest by ch-chuck · · Score: 3, Funny

    Brussels, Belgium (DP) - Bill Gates took 1st prize at the International Software Association's first annual contest for "Reliability and Security" in software architecture. However, contest officials caught him before he left the building and made him put it back.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  15. Marketecture? What market? by crazyphilman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For starters, the home-user market is dead (or, more accurately, about to give its death rattle). Anyone who wants to engage in some activity A has only to go online and download any of a number of open-source or freeware systems for doing A. Oh, there are still a few holdouts; you still see some off-the-shelf software for sale in Comp USA, and I suppose there are some naiive users who are willing to buy them. But, it's definitely going away, and fast.

    Organizations still buy software, but they generally contact the vendor directly, and secure site licenses. An example would be software development tools used by a government agency. In this case, there's very little marketing involved; a vendor submits a bid, competes with other vendors, and if successful, gets a contract. Any marketing that is done is done in a trade show, and the vendor generally understands the target market fairly well. Often, the vendor has a long relationship with their clients.

    Then, there's highly specialized niche tools, like maybe high-end animation software, or music software. But those markets are tiny, sometimes maybe only a few hundred clients in total.

    It seems to me that software is one of the few things with no mass market left. There are only specialized niches that still want to pay for software, and business categories where software has always been paid for in the same way. This is a book whose point I cannot fathom.

    THIS IS NOT A TROLL. I'm serious. What's the point of programmers and techies getting all worked up over some marketing blather? It's just not central to the business anymore.

    --
    Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  16. Translation for Hireabiltiy by rsborg · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ... know your domain.

    Too often I've been telling my friends in the software industry that when hiring into a software company, the primary thing a prospective employer should ask for is domain knowledge. ie, if you're looking to join Cisco's IOS team, you better have a pretty fundamental understanding of networking and routing. If you're joining an CRM software company, knowledge of CRM (at least a specialty like sales force automation) is the primary thing they will want. Even better is direct knowledge of the product/architecture itself. Programming experience is, of course, neccessary, but runs secondary to the actual domain knowledge.

    C++, Java, etc.. don't matter as much these days because everyone knows them ... including those offshore programmers who are probably better and/or cheaper than you. Understanding and becoming an expert in a domain gives you a value add that a non-knowledgeable person can't match.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  17. Welcome to the real world by joss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > 3.5) Developers firmly tell sales/marketing no and why not, cc owner

    Try it in a US corporate structure and your career will be stuck in mud forever. You will be penalised for lacking a "can do" attitude. Meanwhile some other twinkie will claim that everything is fine and promise delivery. Then they fail miserably. Now comes the weird part: The collosal failure of the twinkie will be immediately forgotten and he will be promoted, but your negative attitude will be remembered. Nobody is less popular than the guy who correctly anticipates failure. When it turns out you were right, somehow the PHBs will figure failure is your fault even if you are not involved at all.

    In terms of what will help you climb the corporate ladder, these are your options in declining order:

    1. Predict success and succeed
    2. Predict success and fail
    3. Predict failure and succeed
    4. Predict failure and fail [or don't try]

    Option 4 is a LONG way below option 2.

    I am not recommending [2], just pointing out how things work. A better option is to get the hell out of that kind of environment.

    --
    http://rareformnewmedia.com/
  18. Baloney by pmz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The chapter reminds us that guaranteeing support for 6 operating systems and 4 database backends and 3 browsers means that we have to support and provide quality assurance for 6x4x3=72 combinations of products.

    I believe very strongly that portable coding is possible and practical. The fact that Visual Basic is so alluring to the lazy should be no excuse. There are such things as Java, POSIX, ANSI SQL, ANSI C, etc.. Most frequently, deviations from these standards are small and add functionality, such as BLOBS in SQL, that aren't consistently implemented, yet. These deviations can be supported by isolating them in the software and providing abstractions that make them invisible to the rest of the application. This is called good architecture. I'm sorry that there are so many people out there who are too stubborn, lazy, and/or stupid to recognize the benefits of good architecture and portability.

    The cost analyses that "prove" that non-portable software are better most likely include false assumptions about the cost of supporting additional platforms. They usually leave out the costs saved by organizing the software well, which makes support cheaper through fast problem resolution, fast support for new requirements, etc. Addionally, what are the costs of rewriting from scratch when the chosen platform becomes obselete or the vendor tanks? I'd say those costs are so great that creating portable software should be the rule rather than the exception.

    For example, how many companies would simply go bankrupt if Microsoft went they way of Enron? I'd say that our economy is much more fragile than most people will admit.