[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/images/dilbert2005121017631.gi
f
We have that one posted on a bulletin board outside the hall. It might be
funny if it weren't so true.
The problem of SOA is that abstract concepts not grounded in pricelist
technologies lead to an infinite set of points on a line where each point is
a cost. The more you measure, the higher the cost.
The SOA RM obligates the business/sales organization to create a business
model of each business type as a set of composite services that are then
implemented or mapped to physical web services (or Howie carrying buckets
of snail mail from room to room).
As useful as the RM is at defining the terminology, it doesn't help explain
to a customer, say, the distinctions between data warehousing and peer to
peer services, or in other words, real Business Intelligence systems vs.
massively indexed search services.
One wishes it were like a Mexican restaurant where there are fifty items
on the menu made of six fast to cook cheap ingredients. Unfortunately,
it is exactly the reverse so all of the initial risks are assumed by the
vendor using the SOA RM as a basis for an RFP.
len
From: Paul Downey [mailto:paul.downey@whatfettle.com]
On 10 Jan 2006, at 17:18, Michael Champion wrote:
> So, "web services" are a set of architecturally-neutral
> technologies, whereas "service architectures" are a technologically
> neutral design principles.
As much as I like this distinction, both terms are essentially
"meaning neutral".
|
