Just a Bunch of Web Services! thank you,Herbjörn - Michael
________________________________ From: Herbjörn Wilhelmsen <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2009 7:10:05 AM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Linthicum intones the Last Rites on SOA's Demise SOA = think first; think later = JBOWS /Herbjörn 2009/6/2, htshozawa <htshoz...@gmail. com>: > I do agree that many projects are still stuck in trying to define a proper > service, but I still think there is a need of an architecture to define how > these services may interact with each other. > I was talking with a potential client yesterday and he asked me what an > architecture was. Some IT people think of it just as a combination of which > hardware and software to use, but it's really more than just defining the > structure of a system. > Even if we don't call it "SOA", I do hope that people do not forget about > creating a guideline to define how services may interact with each other. > (Installing an ESB and plugging all service consumers and service providers > with no rules may not work out too well. :-) ) > > H.Ozawa > > --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Gervas Douglas > <gervas.douglas@ ...> wrote: >> >> "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.infoworl d.com/newsletter s/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 >> > > > -- Med vänliga hälsningar Herbjörn Wilhelmsen
