{"id":1292,"date":"2008-04-07T19:12:38","date_gmt":"2008-04-08T01:12:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.redmonk.com\/cote\/2008\/04\/07\/hows-your-t-zone-ibm-impact\/"},"modified":"2008-04-07T19:12:38","modified_gmt":"2008-04-08T01:12:38","slug":"hows-your-t-zone-ibm-impact","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/2008\/04\/07\/hows-your-t-zone-ibm-impact\/","title":{"rendered":"How&#039;s your T-Zone? &#8211; IBM Impact"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote><p>\n[IBM&#8217;s SOA is] not [just] going back to the old, it&#8217;s taking what we learned in the old and taking it back to the new. <i>&#8211;Robert LeBlanc<\/i>\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This afternoon, IBM (of course) re-enforced and nuanced out <a href=\"http:\/\/www.redmonk.com\/cote\/2008\/04\/07\/the-idea-of-soa-ibm-impact-day-one\/\">it&#8217;s message about SOA&#8217;ness from this morning<\/a>: SOA is the technology to build out what business&#8217;s want and IBM is the most mature, thus, best choice for your SOA-buddy. This question is critical to IBM because it want so to sell to The Business, not The Tech People. Simply getting the job done isn&#8217;t enough for IBM&#8217;s SOA marketing: it has to justify itself to The Business.<\/p>\n<h2>Never mind the technology, let&#8217;s get down to Business<\/h2>\n<p>The exact technologies used here &#8211; the answer to &#8220;what is an SOA&#8221; to most tech people out there &#8211; where sort of irrelevant. If anything, ESBs came up the most. Web Services were rarely used, and MQ was a popular one too.<\/p>\n<p>The interesting angle there is that I&#8217;m sitting up in the &#8220;Tech Zone,&#8221; and some folks at a high-table are going on about REST, how IBM people talk about it, how it&#8217;s cheaper than [whatever else], and, &#8220;hey, why wouldn&#8217;t I want that?&#8221;<\/p>\n<h2>What&#8217;s Missing?<\/h2>\n<p>Simplicity and low cost were definitely two things missing from the talk today. I keep using it as a foil &#8211; but, what the hell? Foil, ho! &#8211; that was the main thrust of every talk at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.redmonk.com\/cote\/2008\/04\/02\/mulecon-wrap-up-rouge-it-open-source-in-the-water-support-response-time-and-reputation\/\">MuleCon last week<\/a>. And the phrase &#8220;open source&#8221;? Not really to be found.<\/p>\n<p>Simplicity doesn&#8217;t have immediately obvious ROI, but low cost is pretty straight forward there.<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, during the last break-out session on selling the value of ROI, one quick-witted analyst had a nice snark. The IBM folks were saying how they go into a customer and match pre-existing, already figured out &#8220;solutions&#8221; to customer projects. Stuff like, &#8220;we&#8217;ve got 60% of your project figured out &#8217;cause we&#8217;ve already done 5 such installs.&#8221; To which, as the analyst asked, you&#8217;d expect <a href=\"http:\/\/www.deadprogrammer.com\/fud-you\">the Amdahl muggers<\/a> out there to state, &#8220;well, I guess that means we outta get a 60% discount.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h2>Scale<\/h2>\n<p>The story of scale works, though, if you&#8217;re the only one who can credibly talk about it. In the usual Twitter storm of &#8220;what&#8217;s SOA mean?&#8221; that usually follows a few drops of &#8220;SOA,&#8221; several people rightly pointed out that it&#8217;s just some technology to get what the business wants. As one person put it:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nThe business wants stuff &#8211; they put up a business case. SOA is one way of delivering that stuff, not the &#8216;stuff&#8217; itself.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>If the delivery mechanism gets the business it&#8217;s stuff, then it&#8217;s all where do I sign?<\/p>\n<p>During a customer panel, Jim Ofalt from The Pep Boys drew this out well. Using my words, not his carefully, positively phrased ones: once a chunk of enterprise infrastructure works, you don&#8217;t really get the (easy) chance to change. They haven&#8217;t looked at their cash register (PoS) system in two years. Good luck getting business buy off to change it if the stuff just works. As Ofalt put it: &#8220;it&#8217;s an opportunity that we look forward to everyday.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h2>Selling SOA<\/h2>\n<p>This is the kind of technology adoption mind-set (or lack thereof) that bends to only two silver-tounges:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>We can do it for less, and make more money for The Business.<\/li>\n<li>What we have now doesn&#8217;t work, we have to change it, maybe even at any cost.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>It&#8217;s not like selling iPods: people won&#8217;t do it because it&#8217;s cool, or even a good idea.<\/p>\n<p>Selling SOA as better <i>used<\/i> to be done with re-use. Once we rig-up this SOA stuff, we&#8217;ll be able to save money by re-using it. Analysts vigorously poked at IBM folks on that idea today, no doubt trying to get them to admit to the contemporary folk-lore that SOA re-use is a myth. While IBM folks didn&#8217;t admit to such, aside from the snarky exchange above, they didn&#8217;t really mention re-use as a big deal.<\/p>\n<p>When asked, the customer panel stated that saving money is the primary justification for SOA. There are some benefits from forcing a shared model between different businesses, but it all came down to money. As Bob Bachmann, from Aetna said, &#8220;when we save money they take notice.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.toasttechnology.com.au\/roller\/hortovanyi\/\">Nick Hortovanyi<\/a> had another good reason for using SOA, having nothing to do with The Business, but still completely valid. It&#8217;s to &#8220;modernize&#8221; the infrastructure. What&#8217;s that mean though? See here:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nre:modernization &#8211; skill sets for staff retention (who wants to program in COBOL) and Business Processes to compete in a global market.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>While &#8220;cool&#8221; may not sell to the check-writers, it sure works for your tech-people.<\/p>\n<p>Still, we haven&#8217;t heard a lot about the second option: getting an SOA was what we had to do. It was the only way to solve the problem.<\/p>\n<p><b>Disclaimer:<\/b> IBM is a client and paid T&amp;E. MuleSource is a client as well.<\/p>\n<p><!-- technorati tags start --><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align:right;font-size:10px\">Technorati Tags: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.technorati.com\/tag\/ibm\" rel=\"tag\">ibm<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.technorati.com\/tag\/ibmimpact2008\" rel=\"tag\">ibmimpact2008<\/a><\/p>\n<p><!-- technorati tags end --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>SOA means so much more than technology to IBM.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,12,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-conferences","category-enterprise-software","category-open-source"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1292"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1292\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/cote\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}