Web 2.0 vs. SOA debate: 'wrong, wrong, wrong'?

A service is a service is a service.
Written by Joe McKendrick, Contributing Writer

Jason Kolb weighs in on the ongoing Web 2.0 vs. SOA debate surfaced this week by John Hagel (and covered in this Weblog). He calls the whole debate "just wrong, wrong, wrong."

Why? Because "they are the exact same thing," he opines. "When a Web 2.0 app makes an HTTP request in the background to get data, it's calling a service of some type.  When you click submit and it updates data in the background, it's calling a service of some type."

"The real point is, the software needs to be written as a service.  If it's built properly (and this is very important, as certain Web 2.0 companies <cough>37signals</cough> have basically derided proper, loosely coupled, software architecture as limiting) you can throw another interface facade on top of the logic code an expose your service whichever way you want."

Got it. To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, a service is a service is a service. Or, if it walks like a service, and quacks like a service... you get the picture.

Editorial standards