“Play by the rules and you can be part of it and build something great, struggle against them and you’ll look lame and you’ll fail.”
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
Damn, that’s some high quality blogging right there.
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
“I am firmly of the persuasion that SOA 1.0 is a fundamentally ill-founded idea, so SOA 2.0 might be twice as bad”. LMAO!
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
Isn’t Servlets still part of Java EE?
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
Really great article by Dion.
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
Last week marked a turning point.
I enjoyed myself at
XTech
(as usual), where, as you’d expect, a lot of the talk was
about Web 2.0, mashups, and yes, even “Web services”.
Thankfully though, it’s not the usual “Web services”;
what I noticed (confirmed by others), much to my surprise,
was that the users seem to have reclaimed the
term from the
enterprisey
architects, and, at least
in Amsterdam, were using it to refer (almost) solely to RESTful
(or “REST-like”, ala
Web style)
Web services!
I have to admit, when I hear it used this way, I was taken aback,
and it took me more than a few double-takes before I caught on that
I really could let my guard down; these were friendly folk.
I didn’t see that coming.
soa,
rest,
web,
enterprisey,
webservices.
OMG, I was there and I missed it!
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
Bingo! At least Live’s on the right track though. So if you’re at Microsoft and working on WCF, it’s time to request a transfer! 8-)
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]
“I concur that ‘enterprisey’ should not be a “derogatory” word” Noooo! Derogatory is the point. You guys have “enterprise”; go nuts with it. “Enterprisey” is for people who have to put up with “enterprise”; leave it alone!
(
link) [
del.icio.us/distobj]