Waddya know? SOA is dead says Burton.
If I was paying for Burton services, I would be asking for a refund and an explanation as to why it took so long to identify the bleedin' obvious
The irony may have been a bit thick for anyone to realise that my story of Eric the Architect was little more than a lampoon on the generations of IT attempting to find a home within business (true friend - true story - honest!!!).
Guys - pragmatism rules. SOA never had anything to do with the bottom-line. Directly. And the indirect contributions lacked evidence and credibility.
In an excess of pragmatism, Miko Matsumura shut down the SOA center blog on the back of the Burton article. The new blog will be called the Whatever Center. Love the name, but will the dns changes ever propagate? I hope so, for Matsumura-san's integrity. Unlike WFTs transition to WTH, this is not a joke.
Personally, I'm with Justin Kestelyn:
The problems remain with us, whatever we choose to call the solution.
4 comments:
Hmm...
I think SOA serves as a good intermediary between the enterprise and technical architecture. I personally prefer WOA/ROA, and would drop SOA altogether since it doesn't seem to be allowed to mean anything any more :)
We're kind of contributing to the problem by debating over whether these terms should exist or not - they do. It's that simple.
Thanks for dropping by Drew.
I agree, which is why I like Justin's quote.
We can go all the way back to Fred Brooks' "No silver bullet" thesis to look for guidance.
I think SOA is a useful term within the domain of practitioners (heck, I use it), but take it no further.
My response is here: http://architecture-soa-bpm-eai.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-soa-dead-nope.html
Mr.Burton has said very right. . . .
Post a Comment