26 June 2009

SaaS, PaaS... why not SOAaaS (SOA as a Service)?

Posted by Ramesh Loganathan

A busy day in the rapidly converging SOA and Cloud worlds. Oracle talks about plans for the cloud, retracting from the skepticism expressed some months back. Intuit announces a PaaS platform. Another SOA infrastructure vendor dabbles with SOA on the cloud - striking dichotomy here. On one hand we are still trying to figure out how exactly to make SOA projects successful. And on the other, we are talking about SOA in the Cloud and PaaS platforms for SOA. Even so, I find it a natural progression.

PaaS, and therefrom the SOA impact, follows the success of SaaS. Which itself was the best thing to happen to ISVs in recent times. A combination of emerging application models, web based software UI approaches, new cloud platforms, and a very wide acceptance of externally hosted software solutions - less of technology and more of mindset. Now it is only a logical extension of the SaaS paradigm that now one will expect to build custom solutions on the web (PaaS). Or host solutions directly on the web based infrastructure (Cloud). And the moment there are applications, SOA cannot be far behind. The nature of the cloud beast is also such that the significance of SOA and distributed management/governance becomes even more critical given the rather loosely coupled and a less-controlled computing environment.

So while enterprises may be OK with having solutions hosted externally on the web/cloud, they may still want the integrated enterprise where these external solutions are seamlessly available in the enterprise integration platform (SOA) and also in the enterprise distributed management and governance platform. We can probably extend these to bring the external apps into the prevailing GRC and BAM framework in the enterprise, so it is only natural that SOA becomes a first class consideration when SaaS/PaaS/Cloud are in the picture.

Not far will be the support for SOA as a primary attribute of cloud platforms. Right off the bat one will have the ability to build and host applications over the web, with the default web based UI models and a very integration ready platform - both for consuming/orchestrating services over the web, and also to expose new services (off this application) over the web.

Now... taking this a bit further, one could look at explicit platforms just FOR integration and SOA!  Even now there are BPM vendors like Cordys that are providing a web based orchestration platforms (PaaS). These can easily be extended to offer a complete services and integration-application platform on the cloud. Only, we need to figure out the use cases where one needs integration off the cloud. Needing SOA as a Service (SOAaaS).

The ACORD Information Model

Posted by Conrad Chuang

Congratulations are in order for our hard working data services and engineering teams. Progress was recently awarded two ACORD Accomplishment Awards for our work with the insurance standards organization, ACORD.

We won an Innovative Implementation Award for the Progress DataXtend Browsers for ACORD, in P&C and Life flavors. These browsers will enable ACORD members to more easily use and understand the existing ACORD standards for P&C and Life.   We also won an Early Adopter Award for our work supporting the unambiguous mappings between the existing ACORD XML standards and the new ACORD Information Model. 

If you’d like a seven minute summary, you should watch our interview with Frank Neugebauer, the Assistant VP of Technology at ACORD. John Petrie, Bill Gino and Boris Bulanov discuss with Frank our work with the Browsers and the Information Model. While the interview is a great summary, I'm sure that many of you would like to learn more about the new ACORD Framework, its core components and the business value it offers. 

At 3:00pm ET on June 25th Frank Neugebauer of ACORD and Boris Bulanov gave a webinar on ACORD Information model. An archive of the event will be posted here.  It’s a great opportunity to join your colleagues to learn more about the ACORD Framework and how the ACORD Information Model provides the foundation for information architecture in insurance.

24 June 2009

Apama SIFMA 09 Announcements

Posted by The Progress Guys

SIFMA is happening this week in NY and this typically sparks a flurry of announcements in Capital Markets, as this event can be seen as a benchmark for what is happening in the industry, similar to TradeTech Paris for Europe earlier in the Spring.  Apama has made a series of significant announcements that capture some of the scope of the Apama platform and what we believe is required to be successful in this market.  In different niches of the blogosphere you’ll find some proponents of fairly narrow definitions of what “CEP” is or how one measures CEP “leadership” or “maturity”.  I think the Apama announcements illustrate a different perspective, reflective of the breadth of the Apama platform and the possibilities available to such a platform in terms of building new event-driven solutions in Capital Markets.

Market Surveillance and Monitoring Accelerator

Apama has previously announced market surveillance customers, FSA and Turquoise, and with our new enhanced Solution Accelerator we are capturing our capabilities in a way that allows regulators, exchanges/MTFs, and trading firms to further jumpstart deployment of monitoring applications.  The idea that it would be efficacious to have real-time monitoring of trading is becoming better understood in the indusry.  If you read the release, you’ll note that the targets are not just regulators or exchanges, but firms themselves, who would benefit from detecting potentially damaging activities prior to that activity hurting firm reputations or profits.

Apama Solution Accelerators provide a set of core functions that focus on specific domain areas, but they still retain the flexibility to evolve and adjust as circumstances require.  That is key to keeping pace with very dynamic market conditions.  These Accelerators have proven a key driver to our recent success as they marry the power of the underlying platform with the real “end game” of providing customers with solutions that deliver value.

UniCredit Customer Win

As an example of the power of Solution Accelerators, Apama also announced that UniCredit is using the Apama FX Market Aggregator (another of our roster of Accelerators) to give their FX traders access to prices from a number of FX liquidity venues.  UniCredit is also using the Accelerator to publish FX prices to its eFX downstream channels.   Again, a key point here is that the use of an Accelerator in no ways constrains a client from using the Apama tools that are part of the underlying platform to build out other capabilities that complement the Accelerator.  For some the Accelerator is close to what is needed, but for others it is an attractive launching point.  For further discussion of this, you might want to check out a recent Webinar on “FX Aggregation and Beyond” that talks to this issue.

Lime Brokerage

We added to our broad range of connectivity adapters with  an important connection to Lime Trading System’s Citrius market data feed and FIX order placement services.  This give our customers access to Lime’s trade execution capabilities for equities, derivatives, ETFs, futures and options.  Apama customers can also look to Apama applications via Lime Trading System’s collocation facilities.  Lime is a really cool firm and we see this as a great opportunity for our common customers – both those now and to come.

Connectivity is the lifeblood of CEP and other event-driven applications.  Apama has a broad range of adapters, and we have an engineering team whose specific focus is on this aspect of the product platform.  Integration adapters aren’t “sexy” and they don’t get a lot of attention in marketing literature, but they are vital and deserve a bit of spotlight.

BondDesk

BondDesk provides 2,000 broker-dealers with access to 35,000 live and executable offerings from 120 premier fixed income dealers.  In an announcement this week, we announced that BondDesk ATS (alternative trading system) customers will be able to register their interest in the availability of fixed income securities that meet certain criteria and Apama will monitor the inbound data and provide real-time notification when a matching offering becomes available on the ATS.

So four announcements this week, and more upcoming.

So stay tuned. 

.

21 June 2009

High Frequency Trading driving the need to build quickly, run fast

Posted by The Progress Guys

<p>High Frequency Trading driving the need to build quickly, run fast</p>


In just about any race there is usually a starting point and a finish line, unless of course you are in an arms race.  For that sort of race there may have been some nebulous beginning in the distant past, but there is no finish line. The race just keeps sprinting along, each competitor angling for an edge, regularly recharging their ammunition supply with some new weaponry to get ahead however slight or temporary.

I recently read an interesting article describing High Frequency Trading as embroiled in an arms race. I certainly believe it's well entrenched in such a conflict, but frankly this combat has arguably had a beneficial net effect especially in that it's contributed to the wellspring of invention, inspiring the creative spirit in all the supporting attributes that make High Frequency Trading a reality. Behind any trader (and trading firm) is an entire armada including the vendors supplying the underlying hardware, networks, software platforms and trading applications.  They are all immersed in the war.  As new hardware, software and/or algo's are deployed it allows the trader to do battle and speed ahead even if it's just for a short while.  Competitive pressures, increasing market volatility, regulatory imperatives, risk mitigation and a host of other challenges are the land mines and roadside bombs on the long and winding road that stall and slow causing re-tooling and re-stocking the ammunition (i.e. algo strategies). There is no time to stop and catch your breath or stand on the roadside.

Sang Lee from the Aite Group reports that High Frequency Trading has had a significant impact on the overall market, providing greater liquidity, tighter spreads and overall improving the quality of the market.  At the macro level these are great advancements and mark a natural evolutionary step due to so many market changes in recent years (i.e. electronic trading venues, adoption of CEP platforms for algo trading, etc.) in Equities and beyond (i.e. FX and Futures & Options).  Down in the trenches, the battles rage on day by day as a multitude of traders and an untold number of algo strategies provide the market liquidity by moving in and out of positions in milliseconds (or even less time). The trading firms engaged in this never ending conflict drive a set of imperatives on software infrastructures for building and deploying algos in the High Frequency battlefield:

Rapid development and customization of algo's

Algo strategies in the High Frequency world have a limited life time. They soon become obsolete (i.e. whatever alpha they took advantage of has disappeared due to the competition, economic changes, or other situations).  To react and respond to this inevitability, having the right sort of tooling to recalibrate strategies is a necessity. This includes graphical modeling tools for Quants to prototype ideas quickly, backtest with historic data, test in a scalable manner to instill confidence prior to production rollout and lastly dynamic parameterization of strategies from graphical dashboards. Not forgetting the code-slinging types, an Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for support of event processing language (EPL) development for more low-level tasks.


Abstracting over increasingly complex strategy logic

Supporting Quants with a rich and robust set of functionality from the basics (connectivity to markets) to the advanced (Linear Algebra, Black Scholes, and other statistical functions).


Support for the 'ilities (availability, security, reliability, ...) to manage the mundane

Deploy with confidence. An important role of software infrastructure is to instill confidence that deployed strategies are always available, securely accessed and run without failure.


Support for scalable performance, providing high throughput and low latency

This is probably the most paramount requirement in the arms race of High Frequency Trading.  The race to the microsecond is pushing both hardware and software vendors alike. Parallelism in CEP engines like Apama's Correlator can leverage multi-core processor architectures like the Intel Nehalem


Along with my colleague Dan Hubscher,  I have recorded a 30 minute webinar that describes how the Apama platform along with the Apama Algorithmic Trading Accelerator meet these imperatives.

The pre-recorded webinar, is available here:  Apama Algorithmic Trading Accelerator, Build Quickly, Run Fast.

Once again thanks for reading (plus watching and listening to the webinar in this case), you can also follow me at twitter, here.
Louie



17 June 2009

The power of proactivity

Posted by Dan Foody

Earlier this week (last Friday evening to be exact), I took off on a business trip to Australia.  I was scheduled to go from Boston to San Francisco, and from there to Sydney.  When I arrived at the airport, I checked in, cleared security, and meandered towards my gate.

When I got to the gate, the gate agent was calling out my name.  United's not my regular airline so I didn't have any special status that would get me upgraded automatically or anything like that.  So, when the gate agent calls your name in this situation, you usually think "uh oh". I went up to the gate to find out what was up.  Here's what they told me:  They said that the flight to San Francisco might leave late due to delays in San Francisco so my connection would be tight.  So, just to make sure, on the spot they re-booked me through Los Angeles on flights that left and arrived at around the same time as my original itinerary.

The last 15 years I've been Platinum or higher on multiple airlines - but this was the first time an airline had ever been this proactive.  As soon as I was re-booked, I checked and there was no delay listed for the San Francisco flight yet nor did the FAA show any general delays for San Francisco.  I was pretty impressed and am a very happy customer. I will also try to fly with them more in future (now if they'd only put electrical outlets in coach - but that's another story).

How does this translate to the IT world?  If you can anticipate or detect problems before your business users are even aware of them you, will become a hero.  Some people want to hide issues from their users, but don't be afraid to let your business users know there's an issue. If you are taking actions to address the issue, and the users see that, they will gain trust in you.

A question that often runs through people's minds when they think of this is, will your users think you're not on the ball if this happens too often (is it better to only react to the really bad issues proactively)? Would I have gotten mad at United if the original flight wasn't actually delayed?  Not at all.  The fact that they were thinking ahead was what mattered to me. 

Users don't expect perfection - they expect (and respect) honesty, empathy, responsiveness.  Give them that and they will be with you for the long haul.

16 June 2009

Now That's What We Mean By Performance!

Posted by David Bressler

Was visiting a customer in Switzerland last week and a funny thing happened.

They presented us with where they are in their deployment... they've deployed their first "major" application early last year (Inventory Management), and this year are planning two more applications in the suite to be deployed in 2010 (E-Ticketing & Centralized Checking-in).

They're using a very old version of Actional (v6x), and I was hoping to help them understand why it was important to upgrade to the current release (v8.0). The Inventory Management application contains about 300 applications (including TIBCO BusinessWorks and Oracle/BEA WebLogic Server), and is designed for 400 million messages per month. They're currently doing about half that. (It was really cool to see the Actional console with those sorts of numbers in the dashboards!!!)

Each of the new applications will probably add a similar amount of traffic. 1.2 Billion messages per month. Surely, there's my in.

I started talking about how we've made major improvements to auditing performance, user-interface usability in large scale environments, and CPU and memory utilization, along with general performance improvements you'd expect in two years of development. I was sure this was a certain driver for them to upgrade to a recent version, when the lead architect from Progress leaned over, and whispered in my ear...

The current architecture's not even breathing hard. Even with that traffic growth, we'd probably only be at 30-40% of design capacity.

What can I say? We have a really fantastic engineering team.

And, I'll have to work with the customer on building a business case for upgrading using a different angle.

Patently Confusing!

Posted by David Bressler

Well, if you track our "space," you'd have seen that Forum has been awarded a patent on XML security appliances. Apparently, it's patent number 7,516,333.

As it turns out, Actional has a patent in the area of web service security too - Patent 7,480,799.

It seems that Forum's patent focuses on appliance devices (hardware) that incorporates acceleration, though doesn't limit itself to web services.

To help compare the difference between the two patents, you might look at the top level claims.

Forum's states that their patent is...

A method for applying security policies to data in a network, said method comprising the steps of: intercepting data being transferred across the network; determining that a security function to be performed can be offloaded for acceleration; utilizing a JAVA.RTM. Cryptographic Engine (JCE) to transparently offload the data; performing the security function in hardware, said hardware performing the steps of: entering a request in a JCE layer for a cryptographic function to be performed; invoking JAVA.RTM. Native Interface (JNI) hooks in a JNI layer to function as an interface to an operating system specific C programming language interface library; unpacking data from the intercepted data so that the unpacked data can be manipulated in the operating system specific programming language; and marshalling the unpacked data in a cryptographic messaging layer so that the unpacked data can be transformed to a standard format.

Whereas our patent is...

A computer-implemented method of implementing security for Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) messages which can be exchanged between client and server programs, the method comprising: receiving a SOAP message; determining whether at least one security rule has been defined for the SOAP message, the at least one security rule being defined based on a security policy for exchanging SOAP messages between at least one client program and at least one server program, wherein the at least one security rule includes at least one decryption rule; and performing at least one security related operation on the SOAP message based on the at least one security rule when the determining determines that at least one security rule is associated with the SOAP message, wherein the performing of the at least one operation comprises: determining whether the SOAP message is encrypted, and decrypting the SOAP message based on one or more decryption keys which are associated with the at least one decryption rule.

Looks like ours deals with how policies are applied to SOAP messages, even when they're encrypted.

I want to congratulate Forum for being second to the patent game here... ours just beat theirs, being approved January 20th, 2009.

Of course, we're not new to the patent game. We've got a few around our unique runtime governance technology as well... it's why our competitors are constantly saying, "you know who you do business with" or "you don't want to have all that information in your display, it's too confusing." The method we use to discover services in a network is unique and they can't do it (while running in production all the time, on any protocol, and not affecting performance).

In case the two summaries above aren't enough to put you to sleep on the spot (I've found myself dozing off as I write this myself), below are links to the others. I believe there are also a patent or two pending on the Actional Team Server / Actional Diagnostic technology too.

Patent 5,732,270 (1998)
Patent 6,349,343 (2002)
Patent 7,330,889 (2008)

This last one is the real interesting stuff relative to Actional. The title is "Network Interaction Analysis Arrangement", and relates to the way we (and our partner Software AG) compete successfully against solutions from HP, SOA Software, and Amberpoint.

The abstract:

In a network through which service providing nodes are interconnected, one or more software elements at each service providing node process the network operations. A client interceptor coupled in an examine node to a selected software element intercepts transmissions from the software element to record transmission flow control information. A server interceptor coupled in the examine mode to the selected software element intercepts transmissions to the software element to record transmission flow control information. An administrative node of the network examines the transmission flow control information from the selected software elements to assess network operation.

And the top-level claim:

A computer network interconnecting a plurality of service providing nodes each including software elements for performing computer network tasks and an administrative node for monitoring the computer network tasks, at least one of the service providing nodes comprising: a plurality of software elements in an application layer of the service providing node for coupling to other software elements in the same application layer and in the application layers of other service providing nodes of the network to process operations of the network; an interceptor unit for each software element of the at least one service providing node, the interceptor unit being coupled to its software element in response to selection of the software element by the administrative node for intercepting transmissions in the application layer from the selected software element to other software elements in the same and different service providing nodes and for intercepting transmissions in the application layer to the selected software element from other software elements in the same and different service providing nodes wherein said interceptor unit further forms a record of information pertaining to the transmissions at the selected software element and each record of transmission pertaining information further comprises a chain correlation identifier to identify an operation of a selected software element in its performance of a network task and an interaction correlation identifier to identify an interaction of a selected software element with another software element; and a transfer unit responsive to a transfer command from the administrative node to the selected software element for transferring the record pertaining to transmission pertaining information from the interceptor unit to the administrative node, in order to monitor operations of network tasks.


15 June 2009

Actional for IONA Orbix & DB

Posted by David Bressler

I've been on the road since the end of May and I have also moved, so needless to say, I'm behind on my blogging and tweeting responsibilities. I mean, you know you're busy when you don't have time to tweet!

My colleagues have been out there though, doing some great things. We've got some early trials going on with Actional being evaluated at a few IONA Orbix (CORBA) customers. Since the team has tweeted this, I thought I'd blog about it!

As Frank Lynch said, "CORBA users will be mighty pleased to have Actional visibility, an no performance penalty to boot." Yep, couldn't a' said it better myself.

Why is Actional/Orbix integration important?

  1. It demonstrates a key differentiator between Actional and all other solutions out there... we're not designed specifically for web services. Never were. Extending Actional beyond web services started in late 2003, and continues with the work we're doing with the Orbix team.
  2. CORBA customers are "interesting" in that they are typical enterprise class deployments. They have high message rates, are deployed in critical infrastructure, and are sophisticated deployments due to their maturity. Right in Actional's sweet spot.
  3. In this down economy, Progress has a key advantage over our smaller competitors, so much so that it's hard to actually view these customers as competitors. Where these small guys have to go and develop new customer relationships, we can continue to delight our existing customer base (in over 100 countries) with innovative integrations between the products in the Progress portfolio. This continued innovation enables us to drive market adoption while delivering products that meet real enterprise customer needs.

On that last point, I've got a bit of a new role here. Or, better said, my role is being further formalized as Actional Product Evangelist. I'm very pleased to have the responsibility for socially-marketing some of the new integrations we are delivering to market. In particular, those integrations between products in the Progress portfolio and Actional, and between Actional and some partners. I'm hoping I can have a real impact with this formalization to my role, as well as some fun introducing Actional to some new technologies.

That said, my initial focus is going to be on IONA's Orbix, Progress OpenEdge, and Sun Glassfish. Glassfish support has been released, and both IONA and OpenEdge are in early trials (pre-beta). As I get organized around communicating these solutions, feel free to drop me a line with questions if you are interested in seeing what we've got!

Any existing Orbix customers interested in the Actional integration should contact your sales rep... or me. You're required to have Orbix 6 or later for Java (for now... we're working on the C++ and Java/C++ for Orbix 3, but they're not ready to trial yet).

PS Why not follow Maneesh Sahu (Sr. Solution Architect, Partners), Dion Picco (Engineering) , Frank Lynch (Sr. Solution Architect, East), or Marcelo Jabali (Sr. Solution Architect, West)?

12 June 2009

SOA Infrastructure - Back to Future, No. 2

Posted by The Progress Guys

Is anyone talking about the enterprise service bus (ESB) anymore? My Google Alerts are slow and my Google Adwords program isn't performing. Could it be that everyone already has one? Is it assumed that everyone has one? WARNING: shameless promotion...

Did you know that Progress Software introduced the industry's first ESB? Actually, independent research firm, Forrester Research, Inc., named Progress® Sonic® ESB as a leader in the enterprise service bus (ESB) market in "The Forrester Wave™: Enterprise Service Buses, Q1 2009" report. That seems like a big deal to me but yet I continue to have problems finding someone to blog or talk about it. Thankfully there's Hub Vandervoort, CTO, Progress Software. If you haven't had the opportunity to hear him speak, you are missing out. He's not only smart, he's personable, engaging, and always leaves me wanting to learn more.

This week I'd like to share a video that he did over a year ago. In this 4 minute video, Hub talks about what an ESB is, why you should deploy an ESB, and he also shares what makes the Sonic ESB unique.

Interested in more? Read Chapter 4 of Service Oriented Architecture: Getting IT Done Right. Chapter 4, entitled Enterprise Service Buses, is authored by Hub. In this chapter Hub shares his collective experience of working with over 300 ESB end-users, and summarizes the styles and applications of ESB technology.

Enjoy!

 

09 June 2009

Follow Up to Cloud Computing Panel Discussion

Posted by David Bressler

I made a comment the other day on the EBizQ Cloud Camp panel that was off-the-cuff (meaning, I hadn’t prepared to say something like this, in fact, it kinda just rolled out of my brain on the spot).

It had to do with the difference between SOA infrastructure and the Cloud. I mentioned that cloud computing offers benefits of agility and time-to-market, and was called-out on the fact that that’s what vendors said the benefits were to SOA. What’s the difference? Why is Cloud going to be different?

My answer was that Cloud is going to force a lot of issues because as an external service provider, there can’t be any informal handshake agreements as their would be within an enterprise. Being formalized, cloud providers will have to figure out a way to do the governance... only the solutions they deliver to market are going to have to reflect the true cost. That is, the cost of the service plus the governance of the service.

@KevinJervis asked me to followup with what I meant. How will cloud force these issues?

In short, cloud companies need a valid business plan... reflecting the costs of the service they provide, and governance of the service. Innovative features are critical - easy versioning, rapid root-cause analysis, flexible and customizable security contracts, and personalized SLA’s. Critical for differentiation and for creating satisfied customers. These features come at a price... and their business plans need to reflect the costs of the “whole product.”

I’ve seen the following situation happen over-and-over. A customer plans a project. That project includes a “grand vision” of what they’d “like to accomplish.” Reality sets in and they find ways to do without. Perhaps they cut back on redundancy or they share servers with another project. They cut out “management” (gosh I hate that word) figuring that at first, they won’t have many users of the service, therefore “management” can come later. This happens “intrinsically” as well... shortcuts are taken in the development of the service just to “get it out the door.”

The problem is that these short cuts are often not really explicitly declared. Or, they are declared and conveniently forgotten.

These short cuts save costs and reduce functionality... yet when functionality is expected, the costs are not remembered. I hope I don’t sound bitter but I am frustrated. This technology stuff is hard, and we forget that because the baseline is so low to get started. But, to elevate it to an art-form... takes a seemingly-disproportionate amount of work.

So, what happens? A service oriented project is planned. As part of the planning, a “full” governance solution is designed. However, for the sake of time-to-market and cost, the governance stuff is left out until a later phase. Service levels are delivered through one-off agreements and over-capacitization (putting in a heck of a lot of capacity for not so much use - after all, you can’t buy 1/2 a server, right?). And, governance is forgotten. Service levels are met, until they’re not. Often, “cost-free” arrangements get project teams part way there. To some extent, you can use existing management systems, with manual configuration to get some of this stuff done. And, after all, why put in the capacity for versioning easily when you’ve not even deployed your first version?

I admit that this approach within the enterprise is normal - natural even considering business reality. It might even work for a year or two, or at least until, as with so many applications, the cost of ownership goes up. Services are shared much more than they were initially and manual procedures don’t work. So many things have been moved into and out of production, that you can’t trust anything but log files... and we all know how hard it is to troubleshoot a distributed application checking log-files across hundreds of machines.

Cloud providers can’t do this. Just to stay in business they’ll have many users very quickly. And, they’ll probably have custom service level agreement requirements from the beginning, they’ll need to decouple these customers from each other by default. They can’t have “informal handshake agreements” between teams to “do their best” to make this all work.

Even if they don’t have a “full blown solution” up front, they do need to make sure the right costs are built into their business model. And, that’s where it differs from within the enterprise. There is less rigor within the enterprise for building a proper business model. Many may disagree but I believe this to be true. (Not unreasonably so... it’s very difficult to account for everything that goes into a project, some costs are just assumed... but an assumed cost to a business unit directly hits a cloud provider in their bottom line).

Let me leave with an analogy this time.

We’ve all heard the idea of behaving in a way that wouldn’t leave us embarrassed if it ended up on the front page of a newspaper. Truth is, in the past much of our behavior would have no chance of getting that much air time.

Social technology changes that. We’ve all see videos of people throwing tantrums in airports, listened to recordings of obnoxious people on the phone, and even seen emails that executives presumed would stay within their company.

I believe this is one of the chief benefits of social technology. We will all be accustomed to always being on our best behavior because you never know when someone with a camera phone is watching.

It’s the same thing in enterprise technology. As soon as someone breaks a piece of something out of the enterprise, and offers it as a service, all the costs, implicit and explicit need to be reflected in the business model. These costs become exposed just like people’s worst behavior. Sometimes this exposure is OK because a specialist can perhaps do things cheaper than a company for which the activity is not their core business. However... in this case, we’ve been fooling ourselves into thinking we have been truly governing our services, when in fact, that is anything but the case. Cloud providers have no choice, and their business models will have to reflect that.

I know this is a long post, and I hope I’ve answered Kevin’s question well. As always, you can find me at @djbressler for followup questions and conversation on this topic.

08 June 2009

How to Be Agile Without Falling on Your Face

Posted by Dan Foody

Eric Knorr of InfoWorld recently wrote an article about how testing was the key to how to be agile without falling on your face.

While I agree that IT organizations are squeezed and that quality is often given short end of the stick, I don't think Eric's solution of "optimize the efficiency of your testing tools, environments, and methodologies" is necessarily the right way to think about the problem.

Most organizations think of quality as a role (the role of the tester) - and as a result most testing tools are just that: specialized tools designed with the needs of the professional tester in mind.  The problem is, with modern applications, quality doesn't start and the tester and doesn't end at the tester.  Quality is a responsibility not a role - a responsibility of everyone involved from development through production.    This is one of the reasons that developers really like our free Actional Diagnostics tool (used to be called Mindreef SOAPscope) - it's designed from the perspective of the needs of developers, but it focuses on improving quality. For example, we found in formal ROI analysis that deploying our products in the hands of developers reduced the number of production issues by 25%.

So, rather than focusing on how to make testers more efficient (which will only get you so far), it's better to focus on tools and SOA infrastructure to help developers and architects avoid defects before they are created.  But these aren't testing tools because developers don't use traditional testing tools.  If you have 10 defects, avoiding just one of these development (something which is eminently doable) is as beneficial as improving testing productivity by 10% (something which is probably a lot harder).

On the other end of the spectrum, with today's interconnected applications the number of defects which will show up in production is significantly higher than traditional applications, and you'd likely have to increase your testing by a factor of 10x to get to the same production-defect-rate as a traditional silo'd application.  Alternately, a 10% reduction in the time-and-cost of resolving issues in production easily pays off as much as a 10% improvement in testing efficiency.  And, achieving a 10% reduction in this is definitely achievable... Now imagine you could reduce the time-and-cost of resolving issues in product by 85%...

04 June 2009

Apama Wins Profit and Loss FX Award for Second Year in a Row

Posted by The Progress Guys

Apama has received Profit & Loss Magazine’s 2009 Digital Markets Award as Best Algorithmic Trading Platform.  This is the second consecutive year that Apama has won this award from one of the FX industry’s leading publications.  The Digital Markets Awards recognize the efforts of the FX services industry in providing the tools and functionality that make trading FX more efficient.  The presentations of the awards to the winners in each category were made at the Profit & Loss Forex Network New York 2009 Event Awards Dinner.

The award winners in each category were determined by your votes.  As with any awards like these, your voices are heard loud and clear.  So thank you, to all of you that voted.  And remember, you can make your voices heard again, by voting in the Waters Rankings for 2009.

-Dan

SOA Infrastructure - Back to Future, No. 1

Posted by The Progress Guys

The New SOA Maturity Model

Originally introduced in 2005, the SOA Maturity Model white paper and the Quick Reference diagram were co-authored by business partners Systinet, Amberpoint, BearingPoint and Sonic Software. During a 2005 live webinar an audience poll noted that 40% of the webinar participants were “currently developing a SOA project,” and 37% noted that they would “begin a SOA project within the year”. That same year, Gartner, Inc. predicted that by 2008, "SOA will provide the basis for 80 percent of new development projects." (1) But over the past few years, there has been much skepticism about the ROI and business value of SOA. That doesn't mean that SOA is dead or that companies should abandon their SOA initiatives, it means that it might be worth stepping back to review your original goals and best practices, and move forward to seek the right solutions that will help streamline and cut costs.

The players have changed—Systinet was acquired by HP, Sonic Software was brought back under the Progress Software umbrella, and Progress Software acquired Actional whose product offerings align with Amberpoint—but the goals of any SOA technology provider or practitioner are the same; software reuse, agility and the improved alignment of business and IT. (I like Miko Matsumura’s 2005 post, The Rise of the Software Architect in an SOA World.)

With that, I’d like share the New SOA Maturity Model white paper and quick reference diagram which were updated in 2007. The tone may have changed slightly but it still provides a framework for discussion between IT and business users about the applicability and benefits of SOA in an organization across five levels of SOA maturity, including: Functionality, Cost Effectiveness, Responsiveness of Business and Collaborative Services, Transformation, and Optimization. The benefit of these resources also remains the same… to not only to provide a means for organizations to benchmark current implementations, but to offer a source of inspiration as IT leaders successfully advance the value of SOA within their organizations.

Enjoy!

White Paper: The New SOA Maturity Model >

Quick Reference: The New SOA Maturity Model >



1 Hayward, S. "Positions 2005: Service-Oriented Architecture Adds Flexibility to Business Processes," Gartner, Inc. Feb. 2005.

02 June 2009

Waters Rankings - 2009

Posted by The Progress Guys

Waters logo

Waters Magazine annually surveys its readers (or those readers who work for investment firms, hedge funds, brokerages and exchanges) to choose the best financial service solutions and technology providers.   There are 25 categories in 6 categories, so if you are a Waters subscriber and member of a financial firm, be sure to vote.  Voting ends June 5th.   And, of course, we'd welcome your consideration for best complex event processing platform, which is one of the categories.

Enter your email address
to get alerted when new
entries are posted:


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

 

Powered by TypePad