Microsoft wirft man ab und zu vor keine SOA-Story zu haben. Stimmt zwar nicht ganz, aber richtig ist, da Microsoft das ganze Marketinggeschrei nie ernsthaft mitgemacht hat. (Registrierte Anwender finden die offizielle Stellungnahme im NETzWERK-Portal).
Und nun - SOA soll demnchst nur noch ein historisch undebedeutsames ereignis gewesen sein? Endlich stimmt mir auch einer der Gurus zu und besttigt, da SOA nur eine Erfindung frustierter IT-Consultants und verzeifelter IT-Leiter ist. Was aber vielleicht noch schlimmer ist: Phil Wainewright (Betreiber von Loosely Coupled), der das ganze theater angezettelt hat, unterstellt implizit, da SOA Soooo Web 1.0 sei .... Ich bin nur froh, da der ganze Web 2.0-Quatsch in sptestens achtzehn Monaten ebenfalls wieder in der Versenkung verschwunden sein wird und hoffe, da SOA bis dahin nicht wieder aus der Versenkung aufgetaucht sein wird.
Bis dahin haben alle Beteiligten ja dann noch Gelegenheit ernsthaft darber nachzudenken, wie man neue Technologien sinnvoll zur Wertschpfung verwenden kann, warum bessere Benutzerfhrung (rich user experience) die Effizienz der Informationsverarbeitung steigert, und wie man moderne und evolutionr entstehende Internet-Technologien zur Verbesserung der Wettbewerbsposition von Unternehmen einsetzen kann. Und mglicherweise findet sich irgendwann auch ein genialer Marketingmensch, der das einem deutschen Mittelstndler in einer verstndlichen Sprache erklren kann.
Der Hintergrund: Rob Schatz von Microsoft's Hausagentur hatte Folgendes zu vermelden:
A post by Phil Wainewright, ZDNet blogger and author his own sight, Loosely Coupled, on SOA and Web 2.0 generated some interesting discussion in the blogosphere. Phil predicts that SOA is headed to the bottom of the trough of disillusionment, and that it will slowly go away, but could come back in another shape or form in a similar vein as Object-oriented programming. SOA uptake at the enterprise level is only being adopted for isolated projects, he says, and Phil believes that some companies like IBM and Verizon have experienced benefits by taking a service-oriented approach, but only limited to re-use and the IBM/Verizon case is rare. He goes on to talk about how SOA strategies taken on by various organizations often lack business goals and therefore have a reduced chance at succeeding.
Phil links Web 2.0, SOA and SaaS and sees them as one part of the same service-oriented continuum, with Web 2.0 providing the human, collaborative aspect which Phil believes SOA currently lacks. The advantage that Web 2.0 has over SOA, Phil says, is that it can be business-led, simply because business users can adopt it over the heads of their IT colleagues. Phils post also generated reaction by fellow ZDNet SOA blogger, Joe McKendrick. Joe agrees with Phil that we may be heading toward the trough, but is looking forward SOAs continued refinement. Joe points to an Optimize byline by Gartners Daryl Plummer on SOA and Web Services as evidence for SOA skepticism in the industry, but mischaracterizes it as Daryl condemning SOA.
Full links to the blog posts follow below.
ZDNet SOA Blogs:
SOA at rock bottom
By Phil Wainewright, May 4, 2006
It was bound to happen. About 18 months ago, SOA was all the rage. Every serious enterprise software vendor had to have an SOA strategy. Every enterprise customer rushed ahead with their SOA plans. Now Web 2.0 is soaring high while SOA accompanied by SOAP and the whole WS-* stack is down in the doldrums: What Web 2.0 does well is to add the collaborative, human dimension at which business outcomes operate, and which SOA has largely lacked. What it doesn't do is provide reliable, trustworthy mechanisms for identity, governance, service level consistency and payment. Over the next few years Web 2.0 will assimilate methods of providing those missing attributes, effectively remaking SOA for the real world. It's been interesting in the midst of all this to see Nick Carr and a few others ponder what role SaaS might play in all this. I think the answer is encapsulated in Jason Kolb's insight that "the real point is, the software needs to be written as a service." The missing link that connects SOA to Web 2.0 is a services mentality. SOA, SaaS and Web 2.0 are all services architectures; I see them all as part of the same continuum, and I believe on-demand SaaS vendors will play a central role in bringing the convergence of SOA and Web 2.0 to life.
Is SOA ready for the 'slope of enlightenment'?
By Joe McKendrick, May 4, 2006
Aw, Phil, say it ain't so Fellow ZDnet blogger Phil Wainewright says that SOA is passe, observing that anyone who's anyone is piling on SOA these days, from Tim Bray, to John Hagel and Vinnie Mirchandani. Even Gartner is bailing analyst Daryl Plummer opened up the discussion a couple months back in a commentary in Optimize that questioned the SOA paradigm in enterprises.
Danke an Karin, die mich auf diesen netten Vorfall hinwies.
Wenn Sie jetzt noch den Zusammenhang zwischen Kompetenzen und (Geschfts-) Prozessen richtig hinbekommen wrde ... ;-) Mein Korrekturversuch, der den bidirektionalen Pfeil zwischen Prozessen und Capabilities bestreitet:
Prozesse sind abhngig von Personen und werden beeinflusst von externen Faktoren; damit sind sie instabil und deshalb wirtschaftlich sinvoll nicht unternehmensweit zu automatisieren. Kompetenzen (Fhigkeiten) werden dagegen weder durch externe nderungen noch durch menschliches Verhalten beeinflusst und sind deshalb technisch implementierbar. Prozesse entstehen aus der Kombination bestimmter Fhigkeiten zu einem bestiommten Zeitpunkt. Prozessautomatisierung ohne vorhergehende Modellierung der notwendigen Fhigekeiten einer Organisation sind zum Scheitern verurteilt.
Der Vollstndigkeit halber und damit hier nicht der falsche Eindruck entsteht, es handle sich bei SOA nur um eine Chimre, zur ergnzenden Information John Evdemon's Zusammenfassung einer Diskussionsrunde in Vail am 18. April:
Making a Business Case for SOA
The panel included Gianpaolo and two customers. I started out asking the attendees how many were building a SOA and a lot of people raised their hands. When I asked how many people knew how much money their SOA would save them, no one put their hand up. This was my way of making a point the business case for SOA is, for many organizations, an afterthought. Most of the panelists (self included) advised the audience to avoid focusing on the technical aspects of SOA when making a business case. Focus instead upon the value and agility that can be enabled. I recommended avoiding the SOA acronym because there is no single definition that people can agree upon. The SOA acronym could distract readers from the business benefits you are trying to communicate in your case the goal is to enable the agility of the organization, not explain trendy acronyms. I pointed out that we may be repeating the same mistakes we made in the early days of OO where we focused on (and promised) object reuse but it never really happened. When we talk to business people we shouldnt discuss reuse I believe business people are more interested in how IT can help make the organization more agile. If reuse happens thats great but it shouldnt be an end goal. I also mentioned how SOA can help organizations maximize their investments by opening up legacy environments to the rest of the organization. Another panelist from Dell agreed with me and spoke at length about his experiences in selling and implementing SOA at Dell. Several audience members asked about SOA Governance I admitted that none of the platform vendors have a very strong story in this space at the moment - I also plugged the Architecture Chronicles series and recommended people review some of the guidance in the book.
All of the panelists seemed to agree on three things:
-
SOA is a means, not an end. The cost of change increases exponentially over time dont try to boil the ocean. Take baby steps with short iterations and rapid, multiple deliveries.
-
Do not emphasize SOA in your business case focus instead upon the business benefits that may be possible after adopting a SOA (service reuse is not necessarily a benefit that will appeal to most business people). Build the business case to drive your ROI you may find that your organization doesnt need a SOA to realize its anticipated benefits.
-
It will take some time for the business benefits of SOA to appear it definitely wont happen overnight.
Und um die Verwirrung der "Fachleute" noch zu steigern abschliessend der Verweis auf Dionne Hinchcliffe's Blog und seinen Beitrag Web 2.0 for the Enterprise: Where the Action Is? in dem er darauf hinweist, da die ersten "Fachleute" tatschlich die Marketingschlagworte SOA und Web 2.0 zu einem neuen Brei anrhren: WOA .
