Freedom within a Framework (or FRED) Introduction

by bsatrom January 03, 2008 01:01

 

For the past several weeks, we've been working on creating a viewpoint of our future-state architecture that enables a greater degree of low-hurdle innovation with technology than we currently enable. The goal is to enable anyone across the globe, inside of the organization or out, to make use of public information we provide to create applications of value, even if that value is only seen by a single individual. Call it Web 2.0; Call it Enterprise 2.0. Call it what you will. We're calling it either Freedom within a Framework or the Framework for Rapid and Empowering Development (FRED) depending on to whom we're currently pitching the idea. The latter is our EA marketing savvy at work...

 

The idea is simple: We want to create an environment when enterprise applications can be created and managed in an enterprise way, and opportunistic applications (i.e. ad-hoc process applications and mashups) can be created freely and with little to no involvement from the IT organization. IT does what it does best, but explicitly steps back from "owning" all information and technology in an organization. From concept to implementation, I believe that one way to foster such an environment is to allow the world of WS-* and the world of REST to co-exist within the enterprise. Rather than an either/or decision, we want enable and encourage both styles for certain types of situations.

 

The culmination of our work around this idea was a paper published internally at the end of November, along with a demo that provides an example RESTful interface (which depends on our existing SOA) and a couple of applications which consume information presented by those interfaces.

 

Over the next few weeks, I plan to post excerpts from this paper and some of the meat from the demos. My intent in doing so is twofold:

 

1) To posit an alternative to the REST vs. WS-* debate. I am certainly not the first to argue for cohabitation of these styles. I only wish to add my voice and provide another perspective.

2) To obtain feedback from Enterprise and SOA Architects who have either already considered, are considering, or have implemented a similar design. I'd love to hear feedback in the coming weeks from anyone wanting to way in on any of the topics below.

 

I'll publish the first post tomorrow, and the subsequent ones every couple of days after that. Here are the topics I plan to post about, in order:

 

  • Embracing the Long Tail
  • IFaPs: Enabling the Long Tail and Protecting the Enterprise
  • REST: The Entry Point for Innovation
  • Benefits of a RESTful Interface
  • REST and Security
  • A Demo RESTful Interface
  • Demo Opportunistic Applications

 

As I add posts, I'll return to this post and add the hyperlinks.

 

Looking forward to the discussion!

 

Tags: , ,

Steve Mallett, Digg.com and thousands of raving-mad Diggers

by bsatrom January 10, 2006 19:01

I'm not going to wax much on this whole issue from the "did he or didn't he copy digg.com code" pseudo-scandal (for the record, he didn't really). But I saw an O'Reilly Radar post from this morning that contained a very interesting and accurate quote:

This is a classic Web 2.0 problem: it's hard to aggregate the wisdom of the crowd without aggregating their madness as well.

I promise you that this is going to start becoming more of an issue. For all of the supposed "wisdom" that a crowd may have, there will always lurk an individual leaning toward the "Hive Mind." Let's not forget this and other cautions as the new media continues to drool over the promise of Web2.0.

Tags: , , ,

web2.0

Jonathan Schwartz of Sun Microsystems thinks that we won't word process on the web

by bsatrom October 28, 2005 13:10

A few weeks ago, I was skimming through Information Week when I ran across an article entitled "Office Politics: Google-Sun Alliance Squarely Targets Microsoft." (Click the title for the electronic version) In that article, Sun president Jonathan Schwartz said something that I found interesting:

"'Working online is great for E-mail or writing a blog, but not for writing a Ph.D. thesis.'"
- Information Week, "Office Politics: Google-Sun Alliance Squarely Targets Microsoft," Oct. 10, 2005

Really? I can think of a couple of web-based document editors I wouldn't mind using to write a Ph.D. thesis. But I'm not crazy enough to write a PhD. thesis. Isn't enabling this kind of historically client-server technology (partially) what the AJAX craze is all about? Why would Sun say such a thing in an article that highlights their partnership with a Web 2.0 pioneer? I think the sentence before the quote explains why:

"Sun itself gave up on developing a Web-based version of StarOffice years ago."
- Information Week, "Office Politics: Google-Sun Alliance Squarely Targets Microsoft," Oct. 10, 2005

If they gave up years ago, I don't blame them. Years ago was back when the web was merely a hypertext system and commerce-enabler. Years ago, no one save Netscape and a few yahoos ever said "the web is a platform." Sun's "we've tried that already" attitude, with a disregard to how the web has changed since they abandoned StarOfficeOnline, is exactly the reason why the "old guard" software companies are falling behind. Sun should rethink their approach because packaging the Java Runtime Environment with Google Desktop isn't going to do anyone any favors. Personally, I hope that Sun's partnership with Google means that they are rethinking the StarOffice initiative and that their comments are just a smoke-screen.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

web2.0

Flock: An aspiring Web 2.0 Browser

by bsatrom October 22, 2005 21:10

web2.0, flickr, del.icio.us, Flock

Tags: , , ,

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.6.0.0
Theme by Mads Kristensen | Modified by Mooglegiant

About me

I am a Developer Evangelist for Microsoft, President of IASA Austin, and a software developer interested in agile, architecture, craftsmanship, ddd and a variety of other topics. Join me as I explore them here.