Not because SOA has no conceptual weight or operational definition? How can I not think SOA is a flim-flam?

“There is no single path or a single answer for the future. It’s not about losing a religion or having a religion. It’s about being part of the evolution.”

I suspect the evolutionary idea is flawed. What actually happens is rip and replace along with ambitious big works projects. If IT actually evolved, would SOA be needed conceptually?

“CORBA, ESB, J2EE, REST, SOAP”

I think that maybe the above is an example of why we as a community tie ourselves up in knots. CORBA, ESB, J2EE, SOAP are all technologies or at least a collection of specifications implemented in various products (don’t think ESB is standardized as yet so maybe there aren’t specs for that).

REST does not fit that category - from where I stand it’s mostly a collection of good architectural practices (and I think it might even be accepted that we don’t always use all those good practices in a real system or we relax things a little).

One designs or architects solutions to problems - technologies be they ESB’s, CORBA etc are merely implementations of (parts of) an architectural solution. Note that one might compromise one’s architecture slightly because it’s expedient to use an off-the-shelf product. Regardless the important point is that architecture comes first not last and that seems to be missing in most discussions.

There is no single solution to implementing SOA partly because we are all learning and partly because there are many different types of enterprise integration problems to be solved and wildly different types of enterprise to solve them in. If I may quote from what I think is an excellent comment left by Jonas Ekstrom on another of your blog pieces on this subject:

“There is no single path or a single answer for the future. It’s not about losing a religion or having a religion. It’s about being part of the evolution. Religions are based on beliefs and hopes, but there is no single answer to the future, to the past or to why we’re here. You and your initiatives are just part of the natural selection. CORBA, ESB, J2EE, REST, SOAP, all of them plays a role in the presence, but none will be ultimate choice for the future….

Religions give easy answers, but there are no easy answers. Natural selection will strike again and again until we have reached the perfect SOA.”
(The full comment is at: http://steve.vinoski.net/blog/2007/10/04/the-esb-question/#comment-58)

Anybody who suggests that todays ESBs solve all problems is promoting a religon (even ESB vendors would admit that their products are not panaceas). ESBs can solve certain types of problem when used in the right way and can solve nothing if used in the wrong way. However, the reverse is also true: REST is not necessarily “perfect”, any more than ESBs are necessarily always “evil”. Therefore I am not surprised by Ron’s comments, nor disagree with them. Nor do I think that his comments undermines the concept of an ESB as a possible solution for some classes of problem.

Ronan