This link has been bookmarked by 5 people . It was first bookmarked on 27 Aug 2007, by Bill H.
-
07 Jan 09
-
A big part of the reason that Enterprise 2.0 tools work so well is that whatever information processing shortcomings we humans have, we are extremely flexible, tolerant of minor errors, able to react on the fly and interpolate missing data, and eager for spontaneity and serendipity.
Absolutely none of those things are true of computers. They remain, to use Joseph Campbell's great phrase "like Old Testament gods: lots of rules and no mercy."
-
So both SOA and Enterprise 2.0 are really philosophies; the former about letting computers interact with each other without humans, the latter about letting humans interact with each other via computers. And advocates for both say they're right around the corner, and point to examples on the Internet to buttress their claims. So what's the big difference?
To me, one huge difference is the difference in claims vs. evidence between the two.
-
When I started my doctorate in 1994 and began trying to educate myself about IT's impact on business, one of the things I kept reading was that legacy stovepipe systems, legacy spaghetti, point-to-point connections, and all the other prevalent anti-patterns of corporate IT were on the brink of being replaced by modular, loosely coupled, 'hot-swappable' pieces of code. This change was coming about, it was argued, because of a combination of better tools for developers, more common standards, compelling business cases, and philosophy shifts on the part of technologists.
-
-
17 Mar 08
-
28 Oct 07
-
27 Aug 07
-
SOA is largely about getting these rules in place up front so that subsequent computer-computer interactions become easier
-
So both SOA and Enterprise 2.0 are really philosophies; the former about letting computers interact with each other without humans, the latter about letting humans interact with each other via computers
-
A second difference between SOA and Enterprise 2.0 (which I think is closely connected to the first one) is that a service oriented architecture has to be imposed up front, while an Enterprise 2.0 environment emerges over time. Imposing structure takes time. It also takes a great deal of thoroughness, tenacity, and attention to detail, and a clear vision of where you want to go. Letting structure emerge requires none of these; it requires only a few mechanisms to let patterns and structure become apparent.
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.