LOGIN | REGISTER NOW | SUBSCRIBE
 
 
News on Monday
more>>
SharePoint Tech Report
more>>


   

 
 
Download Current Issue
ISSUE 7/1/2009 PDF

Need Back Issues?
DOWNLOAD HERE

Receive the print Edition?


 
Is the mystery Borland suitor Serena?
Borland software is considering an offer from another company after a preliminary deal with MicroFocus. Is Serena the new company?
06/30/2009 01:55 PM EST

Windows 7 - An eBayer's dream product?
Windows 7 pre-orders can make people money on eBay.
06/29/2009 03:48 PM EST

Know thine cloud provider
Cloud computing require companies to understand compliance and regulation. Third parties will play a big role in regulated industries.
06/29/2009 02:58 PM EST

 

Microsoft Worldwide Partner Conf.
7/13/2009 to 7/16/2009
New Orleans
Microsoft

OSCON (Open Source Convention)
7/20/2009 to 7/24/2009
San Jose
O'Reilly Media

XBRL Technology Workshop & Summit
7/28/2009 to 7/30/2009
Santa Clara
XBRL US

ACM SIGGRAPH
8/3/2009 to 8/7/2009
New Orleans
ACM SIGGRAPH

OpenSource World (formerly LinuxWorld)
8/12/2009 to 8/13/2009
San Francisco
IDG World Expo


 
print Printable version 
Most Read Latest News Blog Resources
Kapow automates website data retrieval
Kapow Technology's Web Data Server 7.0 can be used to create modules that navigate through...

Oracle's Fusion 11g lays groundwork for ERP platform
Fusion's components are standards-based and integrated, but some abilities are lost if non...

COBOL’s future lies in the clouds
After 50 years of use in businesses, COBOL is still lingering around mainframes. But the s...

Digg!  Digg
Reddit  Reddit
Slashdot  Slashdot
Share on facebook  Facebook
Share on Twitter  Twitter

Services Rise to the Surface


By Larry O'Brien
June 15, 2006 — 
For 40 years, we’ve known that successful software design features self-contained modules that do one thing well. In the 1960s, such systems were described as highly cohesive and loosely coupled; in the 2000s, we call them service-oriented. Service-oriented architectures don’t increase the abstraction of how we approach systems; they reiterate what we already know: It’s good to compose systems from fully functional (and debugged) subsystems.

Discussions of SOAs pay great attention to the presence of the network and its implications for data transport. This is understandable, since spending a few milliseconds transmitting a network message rather than accessing RAM is the same millionfold decrease in performance that sending a piece of paper across the Pacific by container ship bears to a face-to-face conversation. Crippling differences in access time were not unknown in the 1960s either, as anyone with a copy of Knuth’s volume on sorting and searching and a memory of tapes, whether magnetic or paper, can attest.

We are at the dawn of the multicore and manycore era (a friend just went to four cores, and I’ve been spec’ing out a similar system, because my life just doesn’t have enough drama without adding water-cooled electronics to the mix). As I discussed in a previous column (“Under Concurrence,” Feb. 15, page 32), we are poorly prepared. Service-oriented architecture is one of the few current memes that map into the concerns that will soon begin dominating the technical aspects of software development. Patrick Logan, blogging at patricklogan.blogspot.com, puts it succinctly when he says, “SOA in its best possible interpretation is just reality for tomorrow’s programmers.”

By the time you read this, broad access to a feature-complete beta of Windows Vista is likely to be available. I hedge the statement because, at this point, Windows Vista release dates are about as reliable as those for “Duke Nukem Forever.” Even though by all accounts the Vista death march is ending and the operating system is garnering positive early notices, its schedule delays and “resets” are all the testimony needed to say that the challenges for Microsoft’s flagship product are only going to increase in the years ahead.

Even if, as PC Magazine said, “not since the summer of ’95 has the Windows interface taken such a giant leap forward,” (“Why You Want Vista Now!” by John Clyman, May 9) the disappointing truth of Windows Vista is that the underlying architecture has not advanced similarly. Running “link-dump” in the Vista system directories shows all the usual suspects. Refactoring the world’s most widely used operating system is a Herculean task (“the Augean stables,” the wags will quickly say), but let me venture that “SetTapePosition” could be moved from Kernel32.dll.

I’ll take it on faith that backup applications use the Tape API. I’ll take it on faith that a transactional backup requires kernel-mode interaction. But, surely, the Tape API need not be part of the surface area of the kernel of the operating system. Conversely, whatever elaborate disk-access juggling is necessary to make backups transactional is surely complex enough to justify dedicated resources.

What transport performance is to network SOAs, resource contention is to concurrent SOAs: both justification and guiding principle. To run quickly in the manycore era, a system, whether OS or application, must be factored so that access to scarce resources (such as, say, tape drives and file volumes) is highly cohesive and loosely coupled.

Evolving Windows toward a concurrent service-oriented architecture suitable to the manycore era is an awesomely large, risk-filled project. To the extent that Longhorn was that project, Windows Vista is a failure, no matter how nice its GUI. I don’t begrudge a building its internal trusses and beams, and that performance dictated the thickness of the fa?ade in places was not surprising. What is surprising, though, is how little the core of Vista, supposedly the results of a “bet the company” venture, differs from previous Microsoft operating systems. That C and C++ is used? Not an issue. That the operating system seems as monolithic as ever? Big problem.

SD Times editorial director Alan Zeichick has advocated (or at least mused on the benefits of) a non-backward-compatible Windows: For Microsoft to take a great leap forward, it needs to put everything, including the wrath of some existing customers, on the table. It’s too late for Windows Vista to gain anything from such a decision; at this point, any changes in compatibility would just be gratuitous.

The Vista architecture will carry us into the next decade and the threshold of the manycore era. At that point, the operating system will have to change or it will be dramatically ill-equipped to move forward. “Bet the company” was always too dramatic to describe Longhorn/WinFX/Windows Vista. It won’t be next time.

Larry O’Brien is a technology consultant, analyst and writer. Read his blog at www.knowing.net.


Share this link: http://www.sdtimes.com/link/29378
 

Add comment


Name*
Email*  
Country     


  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading