What's in a Name?

We’ve seen a lot of name changes for distributed applications. First it was Web services-based applications and then SOA-based applications. Now there are some question marks associated with the term SOA itself. From our vantage point, services are not only surviving but thriving. As customers modernize their applications, services are used in one form or another. Many use terms like “composite applications,” “connected systems” or even “compositions.”

Does it matter what term we use to call these distributed systems? Perhaps it would suffice to simply call them “applications” and know that in today’s enterprise landscape the de facto application is cobbled together from services developed in-house, or exposed by commercial off the shelf applications, SaaS, legacy systems and so on. Different services may support different lingua franca to enable a conversation. They may use different platforms and programming models for development. However, they are all examples of enterprise services. Furthermore, while most organizations encourage service reuse, some simply do not! With application modernization projects continuing unabated—even in these budget-conscious times—silo’ed applications are increasingly becoming the exception.

Of course, your management solution shouldn’t care what you call the application. Nor should it care what comprises the system. To succeed with loosely-coupled systems, you need visibility and control of the whole enchilada – at the application level. You need to track the transactions end-to-end, no matter the platform, the infrastructure or the transport protocols involved. But I digress.

I’d like to hear from you on the subject of naming. What do you call YOUR distributed systems and new project initiatives? Are you still saying “SOA?” Do you use another term instead? Or is it simply your “claims processing system” or your “procurement application” with no mention of the underlying architecture?

Your comments, please.