April 28, 2005
let the middleware wars begin
Hamish writes about Middleware:
The problem is that Oracle is trying to rebuild the foundation whilst not alarming the people who are living in the house. Basically, it doesn’t work very well, and in this market, as my friend Hugh of GapingVoid says. “In this market you are either the cheapest or the best,” and this is neither.Being eaten alive on both sides.
So, from Oracle’s perspective they are getting it in the shorts from the technical middleware providers – IBM with Websphere and DB2, and MS with .net and SQL Server. They have decided that the only attack route left is SAP, which given that SAP is bigger than the next three or four rivals combined, makes it look like a pretty desperate strategy.
40 applications means 780 relationships. Nice for the middleware suppliers, bad for the users.So how feasible is something like that to actually design, build, sell and implement? You know, in the real world and stuff?Is that pretty stupid or what?
Yes it is.
Split the logic and information. Then 40 applications (or logic engines if you will) using one set of raw data equals 40 independent relationships. Change any application (or logic) and it will have no effect on anything else.
[DISCLAIMER:] Sig and I are talking about doing a wee bit of business together.
[NOTE TO SELF:] Stick to cartooning. You are so out of your league.
Posted by hugh macleod at April 28, 2005 11:26 AM | TrackBackYeah, Gregor, when my work changes, so does what I write about. Go figure ;-)
Posted by: hugh macleod at April 28, 2005 12:22 PMugh... I've spent the better part of my so-called career in PR trying to get away from conversations about middleware, software and any other sort of -ware.
Posted by: david parmet at April 28, 2005 12:26 PMIf only life was as simple as the "shouldn't it work like this?" doodles we draw on napkins (or back of business cards) ;O)
Posted by: Chris Garrett at April 28, 2005 1:09 PMThis is, more or less, the central theme of all software development best-practice since time began. Procedures, Modules, Objects, Components, Services... MacGuffins of all sorts have yet to resemble the silver bullet you're after. All of these tools are just to defend against uncertainty and change.
But it's not really a product you can sell. You can't have your cake made out of completely incompatible ingredients, sprinkle on magic middleware dust and eat it.
Infrastructure has to be a first class citizen in your business, right from the start. People _know_ how to build these systems. People are already building them. It's just a matter of commitment and stamina.
Technologists versus culturalists again?
Posted by: Thom Lawrence at April 28, 2005 1:12 PMStarting a new career that has to do with middleware? Wow I don't envy you, as I find it one of the most appallingly boring topics in Enterprise IT. But if you do, middleware is old, the buzzword for the past few months has been "orchestration".
Posted by: ludo at April 28, 2005 1:41 PMLudo, you think Middleware is boring? You should try the advertising business ;-)
Posted by: hugh macleod at April 28, 2005 1:53 PMWell, you can always start drawing network diagrams on the back of business cards during meetings... :)
Posted by: ludo at April 28, 2005 1:55 PMLudo, spot on, middleware is more than boooring, I happen to think it's a waste as well. That's why I say "chuck it".
Thom, you're so right, once in a while technology lead cultural changes, sometimes it does the opposite. Enterprise software cements status quo in everybodys working environment. And that is.. ehh... awful, or at least not-so-good. Let the culturalist lead on and demand less cement so real change can take place!
It's especially boring after the tenth or so presentation where a clueless sales type is repeating the same things as the other nine before him.
Posted by: ludo at April 28, 2005 4:22 PMI love this cartoon :)
Posted by: Ulrich Hobelmann at April 28, 2005 4:47 PM