On SDTimes, David Worthington has published a report Microsoft combines SOA and storage business units: "Microsoft has reorganized its Server and Tools Business group by combining its data storage and Web services business units into a single group....that its Connected Systems Division and Data and Storage Platforms Division would comprise a new group called the Business Platform Division"
Microsoft's Darrell Cavens has commented: "We will continue to deliver technologies that enable customers to extend the significant benefits they are achieving with 'real-world' SOA." The Microsoft's director of platform product management Steve Martin added that SOA projects should be thought out from"middle out, project approach and based on [generating] business value."
All these notes cause several questions related to previous Microsoft's declaration of realising its own Business Capability Model in coming Oslo platform. In particular,
combining Web Services with data storage may indicate that Microsoft wants to promote remote data storage drivers based on Web Services into the 'first-class citizens' in Oslo. While this solution may be quite popular among developers, it also carries a huge unmitigated risk of exposing 'corporate gold' to the unmanaged Internet (we hit this problem when we Web-enabled our applications 8 years ago..., didn't we?). From another hand, this maybe a sign that ODBC is getting hidden from the applications from now on and the data stores become accessible via HTTP only. But this is my speculation only.
I more concern about Microsoft's emphasis on "'real-world' SOA." We have experiences a few examples of 'real-world' things like fat-free butter and alike. Butter is supposed to be produced from milk fat, i.e. fat-free butter is not butter at all, it is fake. The same threatens SOA. I accept only one 'real-world' things in SOA: you can do it or can't. If you can't, please, stop confusing people calling to 'somewhat or somehow SOA'.
Mr Martin has lost me on "middle out, project approach" and illusive "business value" generated from the middle. What is the business knowledge in the middle? Nothing. What projects may be performed without knowing what they are supposed to do and why (this information situates in the top, not in the middles)? If one puts an engine cart in the middle of train, it does not matter where go to - forward or back - because it is equally difficult and risky (the driver does not see the railway).
Probably, all these Microsoft's efforts try to help SOA to survive in the downtime when 'big-bang' SOA is not funded any more. I think, a 'big-bang' should not be funded ever. SOA is not about 'big-bang' but about top-to-bottom conceptual understanding of how enterprise operates its business services and how IT supports or implements theses operations. 'What', 'why', and 'who' in SOA is in the top, in the business, while 'how' is in the middle, and resources are at the bottom, as usually. If you ask my opinion, I would say that I do not see a sense in 'how' without 'what' and 'why'.
"Wona real SOA, gotta understanding first".
Leave a comment