Friday, May 26, 2006

SOA fightback

In October 2005, I proposed the term SOA 2.0. I wanted to make a distinction between two ways in which the SOA technology could be used. [Blog Posts: Initial Proposal, Initial Reaction, Self-Service]

Many (probably most) organizations are using SOA to deliver internal IT benefits, while some people are thinking about using SOA to deliver business transformation and improved customer experience. I don't personally find the former (what I call SOA 1.0) very interesting, but I accept that many organizations will want to do a fair amount of this before they venture into what I think is the more exciting stuff (which I call SOA 2.0).

Of course I saw some useful parallels between Web 2.0 and SOA 2.0 - similar to what some people are calling Enterprise 2.0 or Enterprise Web 2.0. But my focus was not on a new version of SOA as technology, but on a new set of (more interesting) uses for essentially the same technology.

However, the term SOA 2.0 is now starting to be used (particularly by Gartner and Oracle) for a rather confusing technical reframing of SOA. Apparently SOA 2.0 now includes EDA. This surprises many well-informed commentators, who had always thought that SOA was event-driven anyway.

So now the SOA 2.0 meme has fallen into serious disrepute. See attacks by Mark Little and Neil Ward-Dutton, with further commentary by Paul Krill (InfoWorld) and Joe McKendrick (ZDNet).

Perhaps I should sue someone?

Technorati Tags:

No comments: