"Anne Thomas Manes had a follow-up
<http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/2009/05/soa-its-dead-jim.html> to her
now-famous "SOA is dead" post
<http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/2009/01/soa-is-dead-long-live-services.html>
that sent the SOA vendors running for the warm embrace of their
respective PR teams, the SOA bloggers to their keyboards, and the other
analysts to figure out how to one-up Anne:
Just in case anyone is still confused by what I said/meant when I
said "SOA is Dead; Long Live Services": "SOA" as a term has lost its
luster, but "SOA" as a practice is essential for all organizations
going forward. Many organizations have invested millions into SOA,
and they have little benefit to show for it. Some organizations are
worse off than when they started. Given the tight economy, business
people aren't particularly interested in pouring more money into
what looks like a sinking ship. If you want to get funding this year
for your SOA initiative, you should probably avoid using the word
"SOA" and instead focus your efforts on building "services" that
deliver measurable value to the business.
Yes, Anne is right. So let's get over it and move on.
*[ See also: "SOA: Dead or just in 'phase 2'?
<http://www.infoworld.com/d/architecture/soa-dead-or-just-in-phase-2-120?source=fssr>"
| Keep up with the latest software and systems architecture news with
InfoWorld's weekly Architecture newsletter
<http://www.infoworld.com/newsletters/subscribe?showlist=infoworld_soa_rpt&source=fssr>.
]*
SOA had a tough timing starting up, and those who invested in SOA
initially have had very little to show for it. The core issues, as I've
been stating for years, are really around the talent of those
implementing SOA, the "technology first, architecture second" approach
to SOA, and the inflated expectations where SOA was solving everything
from bad IT to global terrorism. In essence, it never had a chance.
However, while many found SOA to be complex and elusive, we're clearly
moving into a new era where SOA is morphing into a core architectural
tenant and is really fading into the seams of enterprise architecture,
providing the appropriate value as what it is -- just a handy
architectural pattern. In other words, SOA is more about doing things
right than technology. More about figuring things out prior to doing,
rather than doing to figure things out.
We're off in a healthy direction, so let's not ruin that. Time to move
on from the "SOA is dead" debate to something a bit more productive.
Agreed?"
You can read this at:
http://www.infoworld.com/d/architecture/time-move-soa-dead-debate-053
Gervas
