Is it even possible to have EA without considering service orientation on some level?
Has Dave's vision come to pass? Is any discussion of SOA automatically a discussion of EA, and perhaps even the other way around as well?
Looking at the enterprise landscape, Loraine Lawson sees signs that this is coming to pass -- stating in her latest post that "in fact, it may very well be that your enterprise architecture will include SOA in its toolbox." And, for SOA practitioners, EA provides that big picture that is essential to bring value to the business. Fussing around with an ESB is not big-picture architecture.
As a side note, however, she throws up her hands around the confusion that comes from "IT's abuse of the word 'architecture,'" adding that "I really wish the term 'architecture' hadn't made its way into IT. I think it does nothing to clarify the huge language gap between technologists and the business. It's a confusing term because you automatically want to turn it into a metaphor, but, in fact, what IT means by architecture extends beyond that."
EA: “the application of architectural discipline to the end-to-end enterprise, treating the enterprise or industry value-chain as a system.”
How EA provides to SOA Architects/Architecture: "What EA adds in an SOA context is a set of tools and techniques to link top-down business-led SOA to bottom-up developer-led SOA in a robust and maintainable way that addresses many of the non-technical challenges associated with SOA adoption.”
So there. Is this a good way to explain the converging disciplines of EA and SOA? Also, is it likely that all major technology expressions these days have elements of service orientation about them, so EA automatically = SOA on some level?
Has Dave Linthicum's statement come to pass? Are service oriented architecture and enterprise architecture one in the same?