Microsoft architect Michael Platt has written an article for MSDN that looks at the disruption caused by the melding of SOA and Web 2.0 into what he calls "a new Software + Service model". Platt argues that users will start to require the flexibility they are becoming accustomed to in private from their enterprise IT departments, who are busy introducing SOA. He introduces the following comparison of Web 2.0 and SOA:
| Target | Consumer | Enterprise |
|---|---|---|
| Marketing Name | Web 2.0 | SOA |
| Applications | Mashup (Local) | Composite |
| UI | Ajax (Atlas) | Vista (WPF) |
| Communications | REST (ESS) | WS (WCF, Biztalk) |
| Service | SaaS | Server (Exchange, SPS, SQL) |
Platt concludes by outlining the common requirements for relationship and reputation, participative content, search and discovery, and communication and collaboration, as well as their mapping to Microsoft's offerings.
Community comments
Why are they different?
by Steve Jones,
Why are they different?
by Steve Jones,
Your message is awaiting moderation. Thank you for participating in the discussion.
I'd disagree with both the definition and the assessment of Web 2.0 v SOA. What he appears to be arguing is that SOA is purely the backend services (and desktop!) while Web 2.0 is the Web UI and lightweight element. I blogged on Web 2.0 and SOA a while ago. It isn't a mutually exclusive thing, some services are best developed using transactional backend elements or WS, some are best developed using Ajax et al. These two worlds need to work together which is where a decent Service Architecture helps.
SOA is about SERVICES not technologies, oddly technology companies seem obsessed with technologies rather than the "S" and "A" bits, you'd almost think they were selling something :)