Flash – Adobe, Apple, Google

Posted on Sep 13, 2010 in Industry Trends | 1 comment

I read this as “We Wish Apple Was More Like Google”.

Okay, let me come right out and tell you that Apple has not been morally right about anything related to preventing Flash on their devices. They have simply played a good marketing game to protect profits and eliminate competition.

Amazingly, even after [halfway] eating crow about their previous decision to deny support for Flash by now supporting Flash-built Apps in the App Store, there are people saying Apple has been right to deny its users Flash on the web. Start with the premise that the only reason Apple is allowing Flash in the App Store is because they have now determined that it would be lucrative.

They need to allow Flash in the browser as well for iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad to lift what I consider monopolistic activity. In the end, this will be lucrative in the long run for them as well, and they will realize it. As for the argument that Flash cannot perform or that it introduces security risks…Adobe, Apple, and Flash/web developers are smart people. Don’t try to argue what the possibilities/pitfalls are without giving them a chance.

If Apple was truly concerned with supporting the “open” web — even they will admit that is low on their list of priorities — they would allow Flash in the browser. It will come. Google will force Apple’s hand.

UPDATE:

To me, this is all about Apple needing to appear “open” as opposed to the merits of Flash anyways. Google has already been labeled the “more open” marketplace and platform than Apple, so Apple will have no choice but to counter this. We have already seen this now with Apple publishing their app approval process. The only way a technology wins is by embracing the developer community, including the new generation and the lower-income developers that can’t afford Macs — Google knows it, and Apple is learning it quickly.

Avoid Designing Process, Technology, or ANYTHING Like the American Museum of Natural History in NY

Posted on Sep 8, 2010 in Technical Tips | 0 comments

I understand that not every building can be designed like a hub-and-spoke technology architecture simply because there are logistical issue with physical limitations, though museums do have major renovations. My frustration would be tempered by a design with a large lobby that has all sections split off from a central spot like an airport.

Oracle Skips Earth and Buys Sun!

Posted on Apr 21, 2009 in Industry Trends, News and Updates | 0 comments

Move over, for now, IBM…Oracle has taken its place as the buyer of Sun.  This may be one of the most compelling acquisitions in recent Oracle times.  In Oracle’s press release, President Safra Catz was quoted saying:

“…This would make the Sun acquisition more profitable in per share contribution in the first year than we had planned for the acquisitions of BEA, PeopleSoft and Siebel combined.”

For implementation architects and consultants, Oracle gets one step closer to total enterprise domination.  With Oracle’s own Linux and now Solaris, the days of Oracle and OS-vendor finger pointing are numbered.  On the core database side, Oracle has now purchased MySQL (it was previously purchased by Sun), which we believe to be one of Oracle’s greatest threats.  As the database with 20/20 hindsight, a lightweight footprint (equaling fast performance), and growing popularity, Oracle has now effectively captured an important market.  Reinvention is an important innovator, and Oracle has taken a welcome leap in acquiring MySQL.

I am excited to see how Oracle will enhance MySQL and potentially fast-track high-impact features (like security) in a way that “Oracle would have done it if they could do it all over again”.

For Java and all the other technologies (hardware and software), products, etc. that are being acquired, I believe Oracle will be a responsible industry citizen, holding true to standards, enhancing community, and providing benefits/choice to customers.

SOA is dead? Sure, the same as Java is dead.

Posted on Jan 19, 2009 in Industry Trends | 0 comments

There is a LOT of hoopla lately over an article proclaiming that SOA is Dead. Of course, the title is attention-grabbing and not an accurate representation of the article’s content (the author even suggests that “SOA” is dead, but not “service-oriented architecture”). None-the-less, you can’t have it both ways; you can’t label something as an “obituary” and then go on to write how the right arm will still work if you prop it up at 45 degrees and twist it three times. So, I will simply state that the author is wrong and suggest a more accurate picture of the state of current day SOA.

SOA projects are expensive and unpredictable. That hasn’t changed and that is precisely the “problem” with SOA. And one can argue that the expensive SOA project has, indeed, died. However, SOA is not the only traditionally expensive approach left in the market today. I find that many of our open-source projects are completed at costs much lower than an enterprise solution would have required. However, I also find that we complete projects in general at a much lower cost than most other organizations.

So, the point here is that organizations will begin to get much smarter about how they spend their money. I don’t think anyone can argue with that. Has SOA matured to the point where there are enough experts and experience in the market that SOA can be easily done in a cheap and reproducible manner? No. When Java first came out, did enterprises take quite a lot of time to implement solutions/architectures cheaply using it? Yes, and I would argue that most organizations still spend too much on Java-based implementations.

The fact is, given smart-enough people at low-enough costs, SOA can be implemented in a cheap-enough manner even for today’s economic condition, while still delivering the benefits it promises. There are wrong, expensive ways of leveraging any technology, and there always will be. We can all welcome with cheers that successful companies have no choice but to limit doing things the wrong, expensive way as they get smarter and more efficient.

So, if I were writing a similar story of the economic impact on today’s technology, my article would have been “Unpredictable, Expensive Solutions are Dead” (where SOA happens to get thrown into that bucket by many companies who have not been able to implement successfully-enough).