The Artima Developer Community
Sponsored Link

Java Buzz Forum
PeopleOverProcess.com: IBM SWG: The Dead Horse Hosted

0 replies on 1 page.

Welcome Guest
  Sign In

Go back to the topic listing  Back to Topic List Click to reply to this topic  Reply to this Topic Click to search messages in this forum  Search Forum Click for a threaded view of the topic  Threaded View   
Previous Topic   Next Topic
Flat View: This topic has 0 replies on 1 page
Michael Cote

Posts: 10306
Nickname: bushwald
Registered: May, 2003

Cote is a programmer in Austin, Texas.
PeopleOverProcess.com: IBM SWG: The Dead Horse Hosted Posted: Nov 29, 2006 7:41 AM
Reply to this message Reply

This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Java Buzz by Michael Cote.
Original Post: PeopleOverProcess.com: IBM SWG: The Dead Horse Hosted
Feed Title: Cote's Weblog: Coding, Austin, etc.
Feed URL: https://cote.io/feed/
Feed Description: Using Java to get to the ideal state.
Latest Java Buzz Posts
Latest Java Buzz Posts by Michael Cote
Latest Posts From Cote's Weblog: Coding, Austin, etc.

Advertisement

As mentioned just previous to this, I'm up in Stamford for the annual IBM software group (SWG) briefing even. It's always nice to go into a conference or "summit" with a theory to or question to test out, as Jon said this year's MMS. My constant concern with mature software companies (or "groups" in this instance) is always how they're moving along the two paths of open source and offering hosted services rather than packaged software. The first is usually "taken care of," while the second is typically a stickier issue.

The issue tends to be that vendors want to create a whole seperate part of the company that offers hosted services and keep the software group "pure," or, the same. I encountered this myself at BMC as the hosted SiteAngel-cum-GuardianAngel-cum-PATROL Express was handed off to a separate group while the core software itself was rolled into the current BMC Performance Manager.

Instead of keeping the hosted (or "managed services") and software groups separate, I'd rather see vendors make them one and the same. As most of you, dear readers, know, I'm a big fan of Conway's Law and the more abstract philosophy that the organization and culture that built an application will drive it's architecture and feature set. In my mind, the further the group and people writing the software are away from the way that software is "packaged" and used, the more dissonance you'll have in the over-all system.

On the extreme end, you have the Amazon example: "[t]here is no separate operations department at Amazon: you build it; you run it." That works "fine" when you're running everything for all your users. More moderately, for existing, large organizations the answer is more along the lines of mingling the software and ops group rather than keeping them separate. This is something I understand Microsoft is struggling to figure out and I'd hope that most of The Elder Companies, like IBM are noodling on it as well.

We'll find out.

Disclaimer: IBM is a client and is paying for my room at the Marriott in lovely Stamford, CT.

Tags: , , , ,

Read: PeopleOverProcess.com: IBM SWG: The Dead Horse Hosted

Topic: When does JavaSE becomes a better choice than JavaME CDC? Previous Topic   Next Topic Topic: Revenge of the speed dial social network

Sponsored Links



Google
  Web Artima.com   

Copyright © 1996-2019 Artima, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use