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.
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 then it sounds.
Why does it have to be a bigger deal before it sounds? Why does a service contract have to make any sound? Can't that step be taken out entirely? It seems to me that companies can save money that way.
i didn't get the memo on this new SOA buzzword of the week...SOA still means "start of authority" to me
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
That is one of the most jargon and/or marketing-speak filled story descriptions that I have ever read on /. I have absolutely no desire to waste my time looking up those acronyms in order to see if I _might_ want to RTFA.
Thanks for the great submission.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act? Shortness of Air? Sin Otro Apellido? Shadow of Amn?
Stranded.org
I think the key indicator in the article that this is the latest in buzz phrase compliance was the recommendation that "Vendors have to get on the pulpit." It's all about getting the customers over the hump into buying all of the application servers and services that will give them true SOA.
The biggest hurdle is that "executives do not understand Web services or loosely coupled architectures" (per the Yankee Group's Philip Fersht). There's the rub, and the value, of the thing. The executives don't understand the value of separation of applications (what Roger Sessions calls Software Fortresses), but are beginning to be taught. If they can loosely couple, they begin to get choice of vendor at a finer scale. They can choose different vendors for differents parts of their critical systems. So the strategy of the large, integrated solution vendors will have to be to sell the buzzphrase while continuing to delivery monolithic messes.
Soa what?
pollster: Certainly, you've set aside part of your budget for SOA deveopment. How much?
CTO, not wanting to sound stupid: Of course we are excited by the synergies present in the technology, and will continue to lead the market in SOA technologies...
And the corporate web site is up to date!
The Army reading list
I will listen to what they have to say when they stop employing SCO shill Laura Didio.
--
E_NOSIG
This calls for Dack.com's Web Economy Bullshit Generator
Some quick examples:
reintermediate bricks-and-clicks partnerships
brand e-business action-items
orchestrate visionary interfaces
Using this tool we can quickly create:
Using SOA we can engineer wireless web services to deliver frictionless communities. It will allow us to optimize out-of-the-box portals and extend our enterprise models. If we monetize viral convergence we can synergize customized relationships and utilize matrix efficient infrastructures. SOA will enable us to reintermediate compelling e-business thus increasing our ROI. Our TCO will be minimied due to the increasing ability to drive magnetic markets.
I've just signed legislation that'll outlaw Russia forever. We'll begin bombing in five minutes.
Inigo: [looking confused] You keep using acronyms I do not think they mean what you think they mean...[looking back down] my god...his whole article is like that.
Vizzini: Whoever he is, he's obviously seen us with the slashdot factor and therefore thinks his webserver must die. You [to Fezzik] read the article. We'll [to Inigo] head straight for the first posts. Catch up when it's meta-moderated. If his webserver fails, fine; if not, the use the wiki.
Inigo: I'm going to do him in with bug-me-not.
Vizzini: You know what a hurry we're in!
Inigo: Well, it is the only way I my anominity can be satisfied. If I use my right name, the spam will come too quickly.
Vizzini: Oh have it your way.
Fezzik: [to Inigo] You be careful. People in marketing cannot be trusted.
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
"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 then 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 whole sale ASP adoption like Salesforce.com."
473 enterprise decision makers? How many best-of-breed synergized Libraries of Congress is that?
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
Just last night my buddy down the street said the CEO of their company just showed up in the office and said he had been researching things for awhile and was sold on the SOA architechure, and they're moving all their old VB/COM+ code to C#/.NET
I have a feeling this is what the legendary TPS report looks like. But they left off the cover sheet.
Yeah... do what the rest of us do... put the link in your sig!
Maybe if they did a little more of the Yankee thing and a little less of the Group thing, they wouldn't catch any SOAs.
Particularly for the guys riding with them on the bus.
sulli
RTFJ.
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.
The problem is that it isn't the jargon of techies. It's the jargon of people-trying-to-market-new-buzzwords.
The article is pimping ASPs. For those of you who have managed to avoid this particular bit of buzzwordspeke, it refers to "application service providers" (not the more common usage). Basically, the idea is that some vendor runs the backend of your applications on a remote server and admins them there, and you get the front end. It has the obvious appeal to vendors -- it lets you use a neat loophole in the GPL -- since you don't distribute code, you don't have to hand source out to anyone. It also provides basically impervious copy protection -- since you don't own the back end of the application, the vendor can cut you off at any time. It also gives the vendor tons of customer info, the ability to sell tiered service (i.e. price discriminate) and lots of control over the product. Oh, and a subscription-based sales moels, which is alway spossible. It falls prey to the obvious problems -- on the face of things, ASPs are generally a big loss for customers. The customer suddenly runs the risk of losing his apps if the service provider goes under, gives his vendors much more leverage over him, has to consume bandwidth, makes the not-very-reliable Internet a point of failure for his apps, etc.
May we never see th
Using SOA we can engineer wireless web services to deliver frictionless communities. It will allow us to optimize out-of-the-box portals and extend our enterprise models. If we monetize viral convergence we can synergize customized relationships and utilize matrix efficient infrastructures. SOA will enable us to reintermediate compelling e-business thus increasing our ROI. Our TCO will be minimied due to the increasing ability to drive magnetic markets.
Holy crap!! That's my company's mission statement! I think I just shifted a paradigm in my pants.
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?
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.
Lots of comments on the buzzwordiness of SOA, and questioning the technical merit. I've been working on a SOA project for a couple months now, and I can tell you - the technical merit is there (as well as the acrid stench of buzz).
The core idea of SOA is that there are a lot of enterprises out there with lots of legacy databases on their networks. They also have small, decentralized app development teams that just want to put the data in front of the customer, as quickly as possible. Allowing all those teams direct access to all those databases is both expensive and risky (from a security standpoint) and expensive and difficult (from the front end developer's standpoint). SOA is a way to put a single point of entry across multiple databases. The front end people can code hellbent for leather against SOAP, without thinking about security or SQL, while the SOA team writes at a somewhat slower more methodic pace, linking in security (perhaps via LDAP) and handling handling the SQL.
Basically it's a way of keeping the O/R mapping and database security problem with a single team, while also allowing individual departments and divisions of the corporation to have their own app development teams.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Dynamic service registration
Dynamic service discovery
Support for one or more standard protocols for service invocation
Note the absence of the acronyms "SOAP" and "XML" on that list.
Patrick