Slashdot Mirror
Survey: SOA Prominent On 2005 budgets
Michael S. Mimoso writes "A Yankee Group survey of 473 enterprise decision makers reveals that companies have put aside money for service-oriented architectures for 2005." This is a bigger deal than it sounds - if companies keep moving this away, it will mean a sea change in corporate technology usage - and change the way/why development is done. We're talking everything from SOAP stuff (ITMJ is part of OSTG) to wholesale ASP adoption like Salesforce.com.
Is it me, or does that article spend a page and lots of big words to basicly say nothing?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
SOA is the latest hype being pitched by vendors who want to sell expensive tools to solve non-existent problems.
It will find its niche, like web services did, but it's not going to be the next big thing.
Executives understand services. A service is something they can put an SLA on. This way they can predict their IT business behaviour - and if anything breaks an SLA, they can be entitled to compensation per given SLA.
The service perspective allows them to more easily abstract between software providers. I don't want to buy "..bla bla a lean mean Cyrus 2.2.8 IMAP server running Debian Woody on a dual Xeon bla bla.." - I want to buy "An email service with 99% uptime, 99.9% during business hours at a cost of appr. $1 pr. employee pr. day". I leave the technical chit-chat to my IT department (or an external provider if that's cheaper) and put up a budget based on my SLA.
I'm aware that the web-services architecture is a somewhat different perspective. But it works towards the same goal - getting a common lingo for how we define our IT infrastructure and under what terms. Web-services provide a homogenous clean cut service interface, which is a good starting point for fleshing out our systems into neat vertical services that can rely on one another (with SLAs if need be).
Unable to read configuration file '/bigassraid/htdig//conf/14229.conf'
Geocrawler error message.
Heard the hype once when it was SOAP. Heard the hype again when it was Web Services. Hearing it again as SOA. It's still the same thing - exposing parts of your business using XML over HTTP. Some will say SOA is about a philosophy, about loose coupling. What nitwits were writing tightly coupled web services? The problem there ISN'T the technology, it's the development philosophy, and products don't fix bad design.
Seen any BadMarketing lately?
As opposed to the current model for enterprise software:
The vendor sells you the app and comes in and sets it up incorrectly. The guy who got the training and all of the manuals gets a better job and leaves. You didn't buy a service agreement, so you don't have the updates that you need. You have to set the clock back to 1998, because its not Y2K. And it only runs on Windows NT, Service pack 2, with constant attention required to keep the log files from overflowing.
Whew! I thought I was back in the 90's when vendors called me everyday pushing e-this and e-that until my head would spin from all the buzzwords flying around. After purchasing software for our company for a few years, I learned to deal with sales people like this simply by saying, "SHOW me how it works and how it's better than what we're doing now." Usually stops them in their tracks.
It's funny how cathartic it is to read an article like that, come away feeling stupid for not understanding all the management-speak, and then reading the comments here that reaffirm that it's the article, not me, that is retarded.
A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
Its a new way of doing something that has been done well since forever but now in XML. So that means it is better and will change the world.