The Google Chrome OS announcement is a 'I told you so' moment for me. Nothing pleases an analytical mind than when the prediction borne out of analysis turns out to be true. There are enough doubters, doubting motives, timings of this announcement. But I always thought this would happen. Google is not at war with Microsoft, rather it is enabling the uptake of 'the Cloud'. As for enterprises, I see every reason to latch on to this trend. This presents an opportunity for enterprises to free themselves from clutches of desktop OS, its incessant upgrade cycles, security vulnerabilities and limitations it imposes.
I remember a conversation I had with one of my friends regarding the same subject just after Chrome browser came out. When Chrome browser came out, every one was treating Chrome as just another browser and questioning need for one more browser. Then I had stuck my neck out and contended that it was not just a browser but a prelude of things to come. It was indeed a light-weight front-end to a light-weight desktop OS. I was not sure how fast this would happen. It looks like it is happening faster than I thought. And my second contention is that it will enable enterprises move to the Cloud, faster.
In my opinion the consumer market will be conquered by the smart phone and netbook. The enterprises on the other hand will only need netbook class devices than smart phones, but not with the bloated OS of yore. Chrome OS with a netbook class device will be a perfect choice for enterprises. Current legacy can be hauled off to cloud and exposed as a plug-in on Chrome browser. And there is no reason why back-end services, yet to be built and which will reside in the Cloud, need to be provided only by Google. In fact, this Chrome OS - with open standards based front-end, will bring in much more transparency and Independence from OS, for service providers. Chrome OS, in essence is taking desktop OS out of equation within enterprise IT.
Coming to think of Chrome OS, it has potential to change the enterprise IT, the way switching technology changed telecommunications. Now in the days of packet switched network, circuit switching looks so much of a retarded idea, even though it was the only possibility during initial days of telecommunication. But when packet switching became practical it changed telecommunication beyond recognition; changing the architecture and business models. Similarly a computing device capable of doing everything locally and storing all it needed - locally, looks so 'Stone' age in the age of ubiquitous network connectivity and elastic compute/storage capacity. In that sense Chrome OS with a browser front-end is set to change the architecture and business models of enterprise IT forever. Desktop OS had its run, now its time for it to move on and vacate the place for Chrome OS. Mind you demise of dominance of desktop OS does not necessarily translate into demise of Microsoft, the same way the demise of dominance of mainframes did not kill IBM.
Indeed we live in interesting times. We have an year to prepare and fine tune our strategies and architectures. Don't miss on this opportunity.
Thoughts and experiences of
an enterprise architect
These are my thoughts about various issues faced by an enterprise architect.
Here you will find thoughts related to enterprise architecture, TOGAF, SOA, BPM, MDA, MDD, Web 2.0 etc.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Business IT alignment: Who cares?
Business IT alignment is a topic that generates heated debates and outright ridicule sometime. There is a Gartner fellow, who declared, "None of you are in IT, all of you are in business". Then some one else claims why IT is so special, no one talks about aligning Finance and Accounting to business. The general feeling is that, it is a non issue.
I beg to disagree. All of these commentators are missing the point. IT and business need alignment, specifically because IT is not like other support functions of business. IT is not finance, accounting, HR or legal. IT IS special. And why is that so?
It is because IT is not only useful operationally or tactically, but can provide significant strategic and competitive advantages. It is not only useful in automating operations or producing relevant management information but also can add new market segments to business, open up new distribution channels, or sometimes add new lines of business. It is this capacity of IT that should allow IT to go ahead on its own strategic vision. IT going on its own and doing its own thing, is good for business. That unfortunately gives rise to issue of alignment.
Business leaders need to understand making IT just an 'order taker' for business removes any incentive for IT to contribute in this unique way that no other support function can. Enterprise IT function can use the building blocks available in market place to create the differentiators for the business. This unique function can not be totally trusted to a vendor.
This is especially true in case of banking, financial services and insurance sector, where essentially business is nothing without IT (and of course a lot of capital). Most business in this segment derive their USP from IT and must treat it as strategic asset (and most do). So when attempting to align business and IT, don't make IT totally subservient to business. There are multiple perspectives of alignment. IT being sensitive to business strategy is necessary but not sufficient. IT strategy must also respond to external IT world and bring relevant changes into business, whether dictated by business strategy or not. So business leaders need to be even handed and do a 'complete double loop' of alignment so that IT strategy has a chance to make difference to business, and IT is not just taking orders from business.
As business and IT strategies can be at loggerheads at times and that will make alignment difficult. But make no mistake, business IT alignment is required for optimal results and IT strategy need to be given some degree of freedom.
I beg to disagree. All of these commentators are missing the point. IT and business need alignment, specifically because IT is not like other support functions of business. IT is not finance, accounting, HR or legal. IT IS special. And why is that so?
It is because IT is not only useful operationally or tactically, but can provide significant strategic and competitive advantages. It is not only useful in automating operations or producing relevant management information but also can add new market segments to business, open up new distribution channels, or sometimes add new lines of business. It is this capacity of IT that should allow IT to go ahead on its own strategic vision. IT going on its own and doing its own thing, is good for business. That unfortunately gives rise to issue of alignment.
Business leaders need to understand making IT just an 'order taker' for business removes any incentive for IT to contribute in this unique way that no other support function can. Enterprise IT function can use the building blocks available in market place to create the differentiators for the business. This unique function can not be totally trusted to a vendor.
This is especially true in case of banking, financial services and insurance sector, where essentially business is nothing without IT (and of course a lot of capital). Most business in this segment derive their USP from IT and must treat it as strategic asset (and most do). So when attempting to align business and IT, don't make IT totally subservient to business. There are multiple perspectives of alignment. IT being sensitive to business strategy is necessary but not sufficient. IT strategy must also respond to external IT world and bring relevant changes into business, whether dictated by business strategy or not. So business leaders need to be even handed and do a 'complete double loop' of alignment so that IT strategy has a chance to make difference to business, and IT is not just taking orders from business.
As business and IT strategies can be at loggerheads at times and that will make alignment difficult. But make no mistake, business IT alignment is required for optimal results and IT strategy need to be given some degree of freedom.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Retrospective
Here is a retrospective on some of the blog posts.
Incidentally most of them are also top content on this blog per reader's choice.
So if you are a recent visitor, there might be a gem you may have missed ;-)
Incidentally most of them are also top content on this blog per reader's choice.
So if you are a recent visitor, there might be a gem you may have missed ;-)
- Agile, iterative or waterfall
- City planning and slum control
- Centralised service delivery team
- Requirements management is crucial
- Challenges in using services as integration mechanism
- Requirements elicitation
- SOA in enterprises or Hype 2.0
- BPM or workflow
- SOA and demonstrating ROI
- SOA Fable: Do you wear a watch
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Google Chrome OS - I told you so
The Google Chrome OS announcement is a 'I told you so' moment for me. Nothing pleases an analytical mind than when the prediction borne out of analysis turns out to be true. There are enough doubters, doubting motives, timings of this announcement. But I always thought this would happen. Google is not at war with Microsoft, rather it is enabling the uptake of 'the Cloud'. As for enterprises, I see every reason to latch on to this trend. This presents an opportunity for enterprises to free themselves from clutches of desktop OS, its incessant upgrade cycles, security vulnerabilities and limitations it imposes.
I remember a conversation I had with one of my friends regarding the same subject just after Chrome browser came out. When Chrome browser came out, every one was treating Chrome as just another browser and questioning need for one more browser. Then I had stuck my neck out and contended that it was not just a browser but a prelude of things to come. It was indeed a light-weight front-end to a light-weight desktop OS. I was not sure how fast this would happen. It looks like it is happening faster than I thought. And my second contention is that it will enable enterprises move to the Cloud, faster.
In my opinion the consumer market will be conquered by the smart phone and netbook. The enterprises on the other hand will only need netbook class devices than smart phones, but not with the bloated OS of yore. Chrome OS with a netbook class device will be a perfect choice for enterprises. Current legacy can be hauled off to cloud and exposed as a plug-in on Chrome browser. And there is no reason why back-end services, yet to be built and which will reside in the Cloud, need to be provided only by Google. In fact, this Chrome OS - with open standards based front-end, will bring in much more transparency and Independence from OS, for service providers. Chrome OS, in essence is taking desktop OS out of equation within enterprise IT.
Coming to think of Chrome OS, it has potential to change the enterprise IT, the way switching technology changed telecommunications. Now in the days of packet switched network, circuit switching looks so much of a retarded idea, even though it was the only possibility during initial days of telecommunication. But when packet switching became practical it changed telecommunication beyond recognition; changing the architecture and business models. Similarly a computing device capable of doing everything locally and storing all it needed - locally, looks so 'Stone' age in the age of ubiquitous network connectivity and elastic compute/storage capacity. In that sense Chrome OS with a browser front-end is set to change the architecture and business models of enterprise IT forever. Desktop OS had its run, now its time for it to move on and vacate the place for Chrome OS. Mind you demise of dominance of desktop OS does not necessarily translate into demise of Microsoft, the same way the demise of dominance of mainframes did not kill IBM.
Indeed we live in interesting times. We have an year to prepare and fine tune our strategies and architectures. Don't miss on this opportunity.
I remember a conversation I had with one of my friends regarding the same subject just after Chrome browser came out. When Chrome browser came out, every one was treating Chrome as just another browser and questioning need for one more browser. Then I had stuck my neck out and contended that it was not just a browser but a prelude of things to come. It was indeed a light-weight front-end to a light-weight desktop OS. I was not sure how fast this would happen. It looks like it is happening faster than I thought. And my second contention is that it will enable enterprises move to the Cloud, faster.
In my opinion the consumer market will be conquered by the smart phone and netbook. The enterprises on the other hand will only need netbook class devices than smart phones, but not with the bloated OS of yore. Chrome OS with a netbook class device will be a perfect choice for enterprises. Current legacy can be hauled off to cloud and exposed as a plug-in on Chrome browser. And there is no reason why back-end services, yet to be built and which will reside in the Cloud, need to be provided only by Google. In fact, this Chrome OS - with open standards based front-end, will bring in much more transparency and Independence from OS, for service providers. Chrome OS, in essence is taking desktop OS out of equation within enterprise IT.
Coming to think of Chrome OS, it has potential to change the enterprise IT, the way switching technology changed telecommunications. Now in the days of packet switched network, circuit switching looks so much of a retarded idea, even though it was the only possibility during initial days of telecommunication. But when packet switching became practical it changed telecommunication beyond recognition; changing the architecture and business models. Similarly a computing device capable of doing everything locally and storing all it needed - locally, looks so 'Stone' age in the age of ubiquitous network connectivity and elastic compute/storage capacity. In that sense Chrome OS with a browser front-end is set to change the architecture and business models of enterprise IT forever. Desktop OS had its run, now its time for it to move on and vacate the place for Chrome OS. Mind you demise of dominance of desktop OS does not necessarily translate into demise of Microsoft, the same way the demise of dominance of mainframes did not kill IBM.
Indeed we live in interesting times. We have an year to prepare and fine tune our strategies and architectures. Don't miss on this opportunity.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Business IT alignment: Who cares?
Business IT alignment is a topic that generates heated debates and outright ridicule sometime. There is a Gartner fellow, who declared, "None of you are in IT, all of you are in business". Then some one else claims why IT is so special, no one talks about aligning Finance and Accounting to business. The general feeling is that, it is a non issue.
I beg to disagree. All of these commentators are missing the point. IT and business need alignment, specifically because IT is not like other support functions of business. IT is not finance, accounting, HR or legal. IT IS special. And why is that so?
It is because IT is not only useful operationally or tactically, but can provide significant strategic and competitive advantages. It is not only useful in automating operations or producing relevant management information but also can add new market segments to business, open up new distribution channels, or sometimes add new lines of business. It is this capacity of IT that should allow IT to go ahead on its own strategic vision. IT going on its own and doing its own thing, is good for business. That unfortunately gives rise to issue of alignment.
Business leaders need to understand making IT just an 'order taker' for business removes any incentive for IT to contribute in this unique way that no other support function can. Enterprise IT function can use the building blocks available in market place to create the differentiators for the business. This unique function can not be totally trusted to a vendor.
This is especially true in case of banking, financial services and insurance sector, where essentially business is nothing without IT (and of course a lot of capital). Most business in this segment derive their USP from IT and must treat it as strategic asset (and most do). So when attempting to align business and IT, don't make IT totally subservient to business. There are multiple perspectives of alignment. IT being sensitive to business strategy is necessary but not sufficient. IT strategy must also respond to external IT world and bring relevant changes into business, whether dictated by business strategy or not. So business leaders need to be even handed and do a 'complete double loop' of alignment so that IT strategy has a chance to make difference to business, and IT is not just taking orders from business.
As business and IT strategies can be at loggerheads at times and that will make alignment difficult. But make no mistake, business IT alignment is required for optimal results and IT strategy need to be given some degree of freedom.
I beg to disagree. All of these commentators are missing the point. IT and business need alignment, specifically because IT is not like other support functions of business. IT is not finance, accounting, HR or legal. IT IS special. And why is that so?
It is because IT is not only useful operationally or tactically, but can provide significant strategic and competitive advantages. It is not only useful in automating operations or producing relevant management information but also can add new market segments to business, open up new distribution channels, or sometimes add new lines of business. It is this capacity of IT that should allow IT to go ahead on its own strategic vision. IT going on its own and doing its own thing, is good for business. That unfortunately gives rise to issue of alignment.
Business leaders need to understand making IT just an 'order taker' for business removes any incentive for IT to contribute in this unique way that no other support function can. Enterprise IT function can use the building blocks available in market place to create the differentiators for the business. This unique function can not be totally trusted to a vendor.
This is especially true in case of banking, financial services and insurance sector, where essentially business is nothing without IT (and of course a lot of capital). Most business in this segment derive their USP from IT and must treat it as strategic asset (and most do). So when attempting to align business and IT, don't make IT totally subservient to business. There are multiple perspectives of alignment. IT being sensitive to business strategy is necessary but not sufficient. IT strategy must also respond to external IT world and bring relevant changes into business, whether dictated by business strategy or not. So business leaders need to be even handed and do a 'complete double loop' of alignment so that IT strategy has a chance to make difference to business, and IT is not just taking orders from business.
As business and IT strategies can be at loggerheads at times and that will make alignment difficult. But make no mistake, business IT alignment is required for optimal results and IT strategy need to be given some degree of freedom.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Retrospective
Here is a retrospective on some of the blog posts.
Incidentally most of them are also top content on this blog per reader's choice.
So if you are a recent visitor, there might be a gem you may have missed ;-)
Incidentally most of them are also top content on this blog per reader's choice.
So if you are a recent visitor, there might be a gem you may have missed ;-)
- Agile, iterative or waterfall
- City planning and slum control
- Centralised service delivery team
- Requirements management is crucial
- Challenges in using services as integration mechanism
- Requirements elicitation
- SOA in enterprises or Hype 2.0
- BPM or workflow
- SOA and demonstrating ROI
- SOA Fable: Do you wear a watch
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)