| Author |
Message
|
| jeevan |
 Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:09 am Post subject: EAI technical trend with respect ibm software |
 |
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
Hi EAI gurus,
I am curious to know the view of gurus on how the technical trend in EAI is going in future? for example, if someone want to learn programming in MQ, it is worthwhile to spend time in it or better to learn portlet? what technology will remain and what will go fromo the point of ibm software for Business Integration? will mq be there as the transportation level? what does the newest project of ibm do eg the process server ? does any other product of IBM replaces mq as yet?
Look forward your view and make this a useful discussion for our future trend |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
No particular piece of software is going to guarantee you a job next year.
The best approach I know of is to keep learning stuff.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
No particular piece of software is going to be replaced in a 2/3 year timescale, certainly in the EAI space.
What's going to be in common use over that period is a different question. The only safe way forward is to be as multi-skilled as possible and follow the trends as they happen.
Of course, if the Next Big Thing is discovered then all bets are off. I remember when data warehousing was going to sweep away all lesser technologies. I remember when all the COBOL in the world was going to be replaced by Java within 10 years. Neither happened, but a lot of people had a go at it.
I also remember EAI & the entire messaging concept being dismissed as "a technological solution looking for a problem" 
Some good rates going back then; those were the days..... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| My question is only from point of keeping job intact, but a view of experieced who have seen the eai trend from the beginning. My concern is not job but technological trend so that people can focus their time and energy on this while working for fulfilling the present needs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jefflowrey |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Poobah
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 19981
|
The technological trend of today may be the legacy of next week.
IBM makes a lot of noise about their overall strategy, and the direction that they are trying to lead the market in. Currently, this is Service Oriented Architecture and various components under that.
IBM also puts a lot of learning material for their overall strategy on their website - believing perhaps that it's difficult to lead people while at the same time making it hard for them to follow.
But not everyone is following IBM's strategy, or planning on following IBM's strategy.
_________________
I am *not* the model of the modern major general. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Sorry, my point of view is very much keeping job intact. Or at least a job intact! I don't do this for the joy of creation or the stimulating interaction with the clients. None of whom I'm allowed to hurt, no matter how much they deserve it. 
The point I was attempting to make is that trends are almost impossible to predict. I was offered Java training because it was the "Next Big Thing" but declined because I couldn't see mainframe COBOL disappearing like they said it would.
Now it turns out it hasn't replaced COBOL but has indeed been the next big thing but over a longer time frame. Go figure.
Likewise messaging. EAI was dismissed by some clever people, indeed the comment "Web Services? Not on my CICS system!" was being used in my presence as recently as 3 years ago. Now it's a prevelant technology.
My 2 cents, possibly coloured by my sad and tragic career choices
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| jeevan |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1432
|
| From the business perspective, which gives propulsion for technology to grow, both EAI and Webservices are good invention. One makes real use of it, reducing many rework and webservices provides to reutilise the existing capaital /investment. Personally, I think web application are there to exist for many years till are replaced by any integrated and ikntelligent hardware technology/devices. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
Ah, "reuse" - the Holy Grail of development. Large libraries of components reflecting a fully normalised data struture. No, that's data dictionaries - and of course you never see duplicated data in a modern shop. 
Large libraries of components reflecting a lexion of business functions. No, that was OOP. And the site I'm currently at uses Rational Rose and STILL has duplicated (or near duplicated) data and functions. Never mind what (and how) things are being exposed as web services.
Great principles, but how many commerical shops adhere to these most excellent principles in the white heat of code creation with the deadline bearing down and the business changing their mind 4 times an hour?
I don't see this idea of integrated and intellegent hardware & technology coming off. People still can't agree on what UNIX looks like except in general terms. Unless Microsoft comes up with a cunning strategy to retake the mid-range. At which point it's time to retire and run far, far away..... 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
