Wow.  By show of hands, who was at MIX?  Virtually or physically it doesn't matter.  Regardless, I am sure most of you (who haven't been in a cave) were there vicariously as the buzz around Silverlight has beckoned your interest.  The announcement about .NET integration in Silverlight (v1.1) was surprising...  I knew it was inevitable but I was surprised to hear about it so soon. 

The name of the conference (MIX) couldn't be better because looking at the audience there it was apparent that there was a literal mix of diverse roles and persuasions.  Of course there were developers with their usual hoo-rah and 'developers, developers, developers' enthusiasm.  Designers with their black and grey attire (turtlenecks anyone?) sporting their Mac Book Pros.  The so-called 'Business Decision Maker' audience which was pretty much everyone else, and they... well, were the normal ones.  Despite the diversity of opinion, background, and interest everyone was more-or-less in accord with the significance of Microsoft's strategy into the next generation of computing.  Competition is good for everyone and a competition it will be in this brave new world of services, mashups, experiences, yada, yada.

...and the Beauty of Choice

For me, the announcements around Common Language Runtime integration into Silverlight and the Dynamic Language Runtime opens up a whole new world of delivering richness that is in line with the overall economic shift we have been seeing in these last 3-5 years.  This economic shift is spoken to in Chris Anderson's excellent book The Long Tail.  In terms of delivering Rich Internet Applictions (RIAs), economics of scarcity governed in Adobe Flash's favor; to develop RIAs your choice was limited to Flash and its scripting engine in ActionScript.  Now many will argue saying AJAX is another technology to create RIAs; I wouldn't agree nor disagree as I am not trying to compare the type of RIAs that Flash delivers from those made with AJAX.  Essentially, the RIA game is open and developers instantly have much more choice when it comes to deliver RIAs.  At MIX there were demos that showed Ruby, Python, JavaScript, C#, and VB.NET being used to script Silverlight and even doing cross-plaform debugging (yes, on a Mac in Safari).  Live performance comparisons were given as well that were staggering in favor of a managed code environment delivering RIA capabilities. 

Choice ushers in an economy of abundance in which limitations and scarcity (in terms of technology choice, human capital/skill, etc.) are no longer as relevant.  In my opinion, choice is at the center of this so-called Web 2.0 and Software-as-a-Service revolution.  We hear terms such as 'consumerization', 'pro-am (professional-amateur)', 'mass-customization', and others interrupting our status quo as architects as we consider technology strategies aligning to business value.  It's no coincidence why TIME magazine's person of the year is YOU because choice is fundamental to any democratic revolution (and no, in this I am not talking about the political party).  Successful practitioners of business, architecture, high technology, et cetera will find creative and value-added ways of incorporating choice into their products and services.  The challenge for architects, nonetheless, stays the same: how to create an architecture to support choice in all of its variety and allow for deep and fundamental changes in the ever shifting tide of tastes, styles, and strategy... all while maintaining high levels of reliability, predictability, performance, et cetera.

Ironic that a guy from Microsoft is talking about choice?  If things keep going the way I suspect, Microsoft will have a lot more to say about choice in the not-too-distant future.  Time will tell.

 Please do attend MIX virtually and let me know what you think...

It's not an acronym, it's a conference and a very unique one at that (for Microsoft, it is unique).  Microsoft is making a big play into the world of interactive design a space completely dominated by the likes of Adobe/Macromedia.  Why?  Well, customers demand it.  Not necessarily Microsoft customers per se but everyone's customers. We are living in an Experience Economy and the value chain continuum expects the delivery of a rich and engaging experience.  You'll see Microsoft talking a lot about this strategy in the form of (yes, another acronym) UX, or User Experience. 

I'll get back to the point of this post...  MIX is the conference for immersing yourself in what Microsoft's strategy around Web 2.0, Software-as-a-Service, and UX in general.

Want to understand what so-called 'Live' is all about?  Come to MIX.

Want to know the ins-and-outs of "WPF/e"?  Come to MIX.

Are you a designer or aspiring designer and want to learn how to deliver rich experiences?  Come to MIX.

Are you a business decision maker or strategist and want to learn about how partnering with Microsoft can help you differentiate yourself with UX?  Come to MIX.

Take a look at the content on tap to be delivered in three days of bliss: https://content.visitmix.com/public/sessions.aspx.  Notice how there are three tracks for the three target audiences: business decision makers, designers, and developers.

I am going to be there with some early adopters and customer evangelists that are hoping to show the world the kind of applications that can literally raise the bar in their respective industries (e.g. health care, retail, etc.).  Ping me if you're going because I'd love to meet up with you!  Hope to see you there!

I find this significant in many ways.  First of all, this is an XBAP - XAML Browser Application - which is essentially a Windows Presentation Foundation smart client delivered through the web browser.  Now this is different from WPF/e in that the .NET 3.0 Framework is required to use XBAPs, while WPF/e (being a subset of WPF) is targeted for multiple browsers and platforms without the .NET 3.0 installation prerequisite.  XBAPs are significant in that they offer the best of smart clients with the ease of deployment that web applications provide.  Yes, you need .NET 3.0 which means you have to be using Windows XP or Windows Vista and that is the drawback that pure web apps benefit from not having.  XBAPs are delivered to the client through the ClickOnce technology introduced in the .NET Framework 2.0.  So why is this significant from a technology perspective?  It's another, very rich option for creating applications and deploying them to your Windows customers that strike a reasonable balance between smart clients and web clients.

Another aspect I find the British Library project significant is the domain in which it exists...  There is a wealth of knowledge out there in the form of written materials (e.g. books, manuscripts, diaries, etc.).  Google and Microsoft are undertaking huge efforts to digitize libraries and make them available on the web for all to benefit from.  To me this is a great and exciting endeavor.  However, personally I have a hard time reading books on the computer screen and many that I have spoken with feel the same; some people don't have a problem with it.  Now take the efforts of digitizing books and couple that with a rich application like Turning the Pages 2.0 (British Library app).  Now, let's consider adding some Web 2.0-like experiences to it...  Online storage capabilities for creating your own research notes, annotation capabilities, tagging, and collaboration tools.  For me, the richness that the platform provides is unlimited in terms of really delivering an enhanced User Experience that could literally change the way we publish, read, research, and enjoy books.

Thoughts?

Now that I have turned my blog into an advertisement (without the benefit of Affiliate revenue) I will tell you how...  It's really simple: Register for a Windows Vista and Office 2007 launch event in your area!* (Read the fine print below)

Use the following link to find an event near you:

http://www.microsoft.com/business/launch2007/signup/default.mspx

I will be presenting the Developer track keynote at the Phoenix launch event on January 17th.  For event registration for this event go here.

I hope to see you there!

* (fine print) - you have to register AND attend

So what is strategic?

Consider the competitive marketplace.  What makes a strategic asset within a competitive business?  Are the power lines running into your office spaces strategic?  Are the desks, PCs, or even servers strategic?  I would contend they are tactical resources that are absolutely necessary to do business, but wouldn't you agree your competitors have those things too?  So will the quality of desks or servers be the competitive differentiator that sets your firm ahead of the competitive race?  Tactical assets tend to be commodities, things that are used commonly and quite frankly, are interchangeable and inevitably disposable; these things depreciate.  There was a time when PCs and servers were considered strategic but then everyone got them and now they're not so strategic anymore.  Now how they can be used, that leads me into the next thought:  Consider intellectual property and to the brilliant minds that create it…  What about the business models and opportunities the intellectual property and thought leaders provide?  Sure these things can change, get replaced and disposed but typically the cost and risk of so doing is substantially larger than tactical resources.  You don't see the capacities of a company's top leadership get outsourced do you?  There's a reason why Microsoft, Google, or Amazon (amongst many others) don't freely publish its entire code-base or infrastructure blueprints and specifications.  It's invaluable, unique, irreplaceable…  It creates significant opportunities for competitive differentiation.  Strategic assets are difficult to put a value on and when you can't assign a value, you can't get too picky on what it costs you to keep it or improve upon it; these things appreciate.

Is IT strategic?

Now many cite the Nicholas Carr article IT Doesn't Matter in response to this question.  The title doesn't exactly do the article justice but he does get points for making it catchy enough to warrant its notoriety.  Essentially Mr. Carr's assertion is that information technologies cannot be strategic because they are mired in the continuous mode of commoditization; innovations in Information Technology become so common that everyone  adopts and thus no one gains differentiation and the strategic value therein.  But would those responsible for the architectures of Google, Live, or Amazon agree with that?  Let's pick on Amazon…  Would Jeff Bezos say that their IT organization doesn't matter?  Consider the Amazon Web Services such as the E-commerce service, the Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2), the Simple Storage Service (S3) and then read Jeff Bezos' defense and positioning of Amazon's emerging strategy.  It will become clear to those who follow these pointers that Amazon is not just about selling books.  The bottom line is that Amazon's IT group has created an architecture so solid in terms of scale, availability, performance, etc. that they can sell its capabilities to others and actually generate revenue.  Yes, that's right…  An IT organization not being viewed as a cost.  This is an example of the strategic value potential of architecture and the ingenuity of engineers who build it.  While the technologies themselves can be considered commodities, the architecture of using them skillfully and creatively can yield strategic value and I think Amazon (among others) is an example of this.  With this, I suggest that an architecture can be more valuable than the sum of its individual parts.

Selling the Strategic IT Proposition

Don’t.  At least not explicitly.  I don't know for sure (obviously) but I would venture a guess that the IT gurus at Amazon circa 1995 did not start suggesting to build their infrastructure so they could sell it.  Instead, their goal was to create the best infrastructure to exploit the Long Tail and sell tons of things most people at the time were constrained by scarcity.  Amazon's architecture had proven to be so versatile and resilient that some could argue it was a primary factor in Amazon's survival through the dot com bust.  Now I realize that you're probably murmuring that not every company is like Amazon and that IT can't be strategic in that sense…  My point is not to suggest that all IT organizations have be Amazon, Google or Microsoft.  Be pragmatic and practical but have big aspirations; such is good advice for architects.  Value starts with trust and credibility and actions speak louder than words.  No IT organization will ever be considered strategic by the business if the website is constantly going down or solution delivery is consistently overdue and past budget.  Leverage existing technology investments and skills, be smart about acquiring and new technologies and talent and use them as the pieces of a solid architecture whose primary goal is world-class reliability in its broadest sense.

As a general point of advice, as technologists, we need to think beyond the gibberish of compilers and runtimes, configurations and scripts and become entrepreneurs constantly thinking of ways to add competitive differentiation and value to the business and its employees, partners, and customers.  As I stated in a previous post, finding ways to make the IT organization (and thus the business) more agile is a great strategic proposition; proven over time, it is priceless and worthy of a cheesy MasterCard commercial.

Comments welcome as usual...

Windows Presentation Foundation is a powerful technology to delivery rich user experiences (ux) to users of rich client applications on Windows XP (SP2) and Vista. Many critics of WPF claim that its breadth and potential adoption outside the enterprise will be limited because of its dependance on the .NET Framework 3.0 and its installation on Windows operating systems.  Fair enough.  But WPF/E begs to differ and in terms of delivering rich user experiences through the browser and across platform Flash isn't the only game in town anymore.  I know, I know... 'What about AJAX?' Well, what about it? The two technologies (WPF/E and AJAX) aren't mutually exclusive, in fact, they can be used synergistically.  Don't believe me? Check this out.  Okay, before I get flamed if you visited that link, let me explain...  This is the first pre-release look at WPF/E and in no way represents how it will be once it's released; it will only get better and that means its deployment model will be less intrusive. This sample uses XAML (XML Application Markup Language) in combination with AJAX.  Pretty slick.  Choice is good and this is yet another technology to add to the list of options for delivering value to users.

For those eager to look deeper at WPF and/or WPF/E take a look at the following:

.NET Framework 3.0 Redistributable (for WPF)

WPF/E Community Technology Preview (Dec 2006) for Windows or Mac

WPF/E SDK Community Technology Preview (Dec 2006)

WPF/E Samples

AJAX Toolkit

For those who read my ramblings (the two of you know who you are) will notice that I have been silent for a while. Typically my process works like this: I write first to my OneNote (2007 rocks BTW) notebook and then if I think it is blog-worthy (not a very high bar) I will post it.  As lame as it sounds, I forgot my password to this site and have not taken the extra steps to recovering it until now.  So my next step is to post the many scattered thoughts I have had retroactively.  Now that I have my password there should be no reason to not post more consistently.

I am really excited about Microsoft's acquisition of Softricity.  It is one of the most brilliant acquisitions Microsoft could have made because the amazing technology can be applied in countless ways, one being SaaS.  For those not familiar with Application Virtualization, it is essentially the ability for an instance of an application to be executed within its own, isolated runtime container having its own configuration, data, security, etc. without an underlying dependency on the host's configuration, data, or security.  Essentially it's a sandbox for an application that can leverage host services as needed (dynamically).  This is somewhat different from the concept today around process boundaries; consider the notion of process boundaries but move it higher up the logical stack.  Processes are much more coupled to the underlying system and its configuration than an isolated, virtualized application.  In terms of multi-tenancy and the ability to scale and be available, the virtualization proposition is a fascinating one.

A rather powerful concept.  Essentially, this is the notion of utility computing - where shared infrastructure resources can be dynamically allocated and leveraged by need and policy-mandated priority.  I am not saying that application virtualization is the end-all, be-all for SaaS or that it represents a turn-key solution for SaaS…  What I am suggesting is that given the trend and technology for virtualization, I would not be surprised if it played a huge part in the rapid development strategies for creating and supporting SaaS.  It would be interesting to see if and how Microsoft incorporates the Softricity technology into its platform for SaaS and the toolsets for rapid development and management. 

Thoughts?

To frame the analysis a bit let's think of other techie-architect roles.  I've heard of Infrastructure Architect, a broad discipline often encompassing roles like Server Architect, Storage Architect, Network Architect, Messaging Architect, and in some cases and by some views even a Data Architect (among others).  There is Solutions Architect, which like its Infrastructure counterpart encompasses specific roles, for example Application or Software Architect, Integration Architect, or again Data Architect (…).  What makes the distinguishing case for each?  Well, a Storage Architect for example would be focusing on technology-specific elements such as SANs or NAS devices and the topologies associated with them, a Network Architect would similarly focus on network-specific devices and topologies.  The Software/Application Architect is more broad but focuses on application platform technologies and environments such as Java EE or .NET, usually associated with a mid-market to enterprise setting (in terms of scale).  Integration Architects would focus on middleware and integration scenarios for data and software.  Of course, regardless of particular discipline there is a knowledge of best practices, patterns, standards, and reference architectures that an architect should be expertly aware of which further distinguishes him/her from their fellow engineers.  There are much more competencies required to be an architect that is outside the scope of this examination, but can be alluded to here.  The nutshell here is scope.  Now let's take a look at Web Architect.

A Web Architect would focus on web-specific technologies and scenarios and apply best practices, patterns, and oftentimes reference architectures around delivering web-native experiences with software.  In terms of technologies, Asynchronous Javascript and XML (AJAX) is predominant for delivering rich client experiences on the web and for stylistic standards the Web Architect would prescribe XHTML and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS).  Understanding of web browser design and W3C standards compliance/adoption would be analogous to a Software Architect developing smart clients would need to know the target client environment (Windows, Linux… .NET/Mono or Java SE/ME and which version of their respective runtimes, etc.).  Content syndication and aggregation scenarios and technologies such as RSS and ATOM, and data interconnectivity with web service APIs either via SOAP, REST, and/or POX for rich and loosely coupled functionality.  The concepts surrounding 'mashups' in terms of application composition would be a particular focus of a Web Architect analogous to composite application designs and the associated patterns such as Dependency Injection (Inversion of Control).  A Web Architect would have knowledge of proprietary technologies such as Adobe Flash and Flex as well as Microsoft's Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) and its web delivery subset in WPF/e (Ibid.).  Then the juicy architecture stuff around session and state management, instrumentation, caching design, security and identity, smart client and mobile to web topologies, user experience patterns and practices, performance and scalability considerations, service-oriented architecture, and very importantly, peer-to-peer architecture and design.  Sure, most of the things mentioned here are relevant to Software/Application Architects just as the implications of these things would have upon the Infrastructure Architecture disciplines.  Given the specificity of the target environment and related technologies, I can see how the role of Web Architect is valid and even necessary.

Of course, it wouldn't be much of a stretch for a Software/Application Architect with web knowledge to transition to a specific Web Architect distinction, but given the differences between Web 2.0 application development and Web 1.0 application development, there would be much experience to be gained on the former.

Now that I've stated the obvious, I'll get to the point of this blog post.

For a company to stay competitive it must innovative: delivering novel and advanced products and services for which there is little or no equal in the marketplace.  But is that enough in our global economy?  Absolutely not.  Innovations can and do get copied, imitated, and downright stolen; if you create something that you consider truly innovative, it would be wise to keep the champagne bottles corked and the cigars unlit because chances are, you're not the only one and you can bet you life that you won't be for long if you happen to be…  So, what is the true differentiator that enables Company A to win over Company B?  One very simple word: Agility.

Within the context of this discussion, agility, as I refer to it simply means: the ability to create and deliver value faster than the competition.  Notice I didn't say 'create and deliver innovation faster than the competition' because innovation does not necessarily equal value.  An excellent background treatise of this assertion can be found here.  There is a lot of focus in companies to do more with less, to lower the cost of development, factor TCO and ROI, etc.  Sometimes the focus on cost is so myopic because regardless of how much less it costs to develop innovation, if the competition delivers first and can continually improve and advance faster, then cost savings don't hold as much relevance.

Why this discussion?  Well, technology historically has fostered agility.  The true sweet spot for technology is when it can make you innovate faster and at a lesser cost; in this case, technology itself is an innovation and the implementers can achieve competitive differentiation by its rapid adoption and utilization.  But only for a time while the competition itself ramps up because as stated before, innovation can be copied and emulated.  It's a vicious circle that many executives don't understand and thus foster a hate-love-hate relationship with Information Technology.  Innovation in today's world is a must and technology is a strategic enabler of innovation, yet it is a constant moving target.

The true mission of any player in a competitive environment is agility.  It is a basic characteristic of life; the agile of the species survive, the less-than-agile die.  There are so many companies out there with great potential that are very change adverse.  Change is a given in a quest towards agility and that is primarily what causes IT project failure: lack of change management.  This is why I am so passionate about the strategic nature of architecture within businesses as it should be their passion and drive to create an environment where change is embraced and enabled.

What is a service?

In this context, a service is web-native software.  By web-native I mean that it is envisioned, designed, and developed for the web as a platform much the same way Win32 MFC applications were designed for Windows.  As with the latter example, most software today targets a specific operating system environment and relies upon the vendor-provided or 3rd-party vendor enhanced APIs to run.  A web service of the future would be written targeting the web as a platform, complete with foundational services such as security, storage, preferences, etc.; these services would be fronted by provided interfaces - graphical and programmatic - that allow users to utilize the service as they see fit.  A great example is that of TurboTax.  For the longest time, the TurboTax software was a packaged application that one would buy and install locally on their computer.  For a while now, the same software is available online and the functional differences between the installed and online versions can scarce be seen.  Essentially, the makers of TurboTax have produced another channel in which they can monetize an existing software asset, yet they charge more-or-less the same amount for the software.  But what if they were to subsidize the fee with paid advertising?  What would that do to the customer base and their competition?  These are some interesting questions that this new paradigm of software is forcing companies who sell software to ask…  As with the rise of any new paradigm in technology, new business models emerge, new players and faces emerge - creating opportunities.

Consider the software you have on your computer and imagine it existing on the web in addition to your computer.  Such a model could provide a seamless experience between the two and enables a balance between access from anywhere or any device and maintaining the personal experience and richness of your own computer.  With this concept, the traditional meaning associated with software changes into more of a service, a web-native service that opens up the distribution to include an unlimited number of channels.

The interesting architectural consideration of course is how these web-native services are designed with respect to other web-native services.  Many of these web-native services will themselves be mash-ups of many other web service components that may or may not be within the immediate control of the developer, registering and communicating though standards-based technology and protocol.  Solutions Architects will be busy considering data design with respect to multi-tenancy and security; with mutli-tenancy comes interesting discussions around scalability, performance, and reliability among other things.  Infrastructure Architects would be occupied with supporting the large infrastructure needed to provide these services to millions of concurrent users and in many cases, manage the service-level agreements entered into with customers.  In a nutshell, there is so much more to this than AJAX…

Conceptually, it sounds do-able, but in the current state of IT Service Delivery and Management, we have a ways to go and the platform stacks and tools that are required to enable this emerging model are only beginning to come out of the research and development labs…  Sure, you could develop web-native software today just like you could develop Windows applications prior to MFC or VB6 and toolsets like Visual Studio, but it was complex and time-consuming.  We could discuss this for hours.  It's a great time to be in the industry.  We'll discuss more in the coming weeks.