- What is China? https://t.co/mikp0zCbsL, 2 hours ago
- Why else would it even exist as a thing https://t.co/LzDbxjASrB, 2 hours ago
- I love this. But the average low info voter cares not about these vita.....oooh! kardashian! https://t.co/uUjT3zbYiP, 2 hours ago
- RT @hitRECordJoe: NO SOUP FOR YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We had our long-awaited @hitRECord soup cook-off. Winner & champion: @Jen_Gerdano (no… https://t.co/EU1jIPIbYd, 2 hours ago
- But it won't. It never will. Like AI will never eliminate human piloted cars. And white truffle oil will never be a… https://t.co/QOKii6p2es, 2 hours ago
- How about cancer violence? Where's the worst place for that? Or car violence? Or treatable disease? https://t.co/PIAxahIAWA, 2 hours ago
- What does it say? https://t.co/gwz4wfU3GU, 3 hours ago
- TLDR. Did he grab her...um... vitals? https://t.co/vtF2xTsGLM, 3 hours ago
- Not, you know, reduce the tax burden or rationalize immigration or tackle trade imbalance. No. Stroke leftist consp… https://t.co/miV5z1vBBf, 3 hours ago
- You guys know I love you. But dude. https://t.co/537NNowPnh, 3 hours ago
- There's no Russian named Ken. So. #fakedressing https://t.co/tvQv4R8cwl, 3 hours ago
- Soooooooooooo brave! One more 'o' just for emphasis on your bravery. Do they still award the iron cross? https://t.co/gKMrwbNdM6, 3 hours ago
- Hibernating animals. Unborn children. Who cares https://t.co/xYNsjmTqrX, 3 hours ago
Posted on October 7, 2010 | 1 CommentA model is useful if it describes something in a context that renders a complex topic easier to digest for specific audience. Its purpose is to describe, to communicate. It is an expression of a viewpoint. It isn't a detailed map or a blueprint. It is representative of a system, it doesn't depict the system. It is an abstraction. I'm afraid we model too frequently as a cover for not actually producing things of value.
Posted on October 5, 2010 | No CommentsSuggesting architecture in general, or enterprise architecture in particular, doesn't add value or is otherwise a fiscal black hole is akin to declaring that badly executed means discredits the ends. The objective of enhancing Business-IT alignment is a worthy one. Just because a bunch of charlatans over time have discredited one method of achieving that alignment doesn't mean we shouldn't bother.
Posted on October 4, 2010 | 1 CommentWith a weak crop of developers and architects, I'm concerned we're growing a generation of bad IT managers, directors, VP's and CIO/CTOs. I'm afraid our next generation leadership will be more concerned with the acronyms after their names, with frameworks and methodologies, than with the actual work of IT. That is, with theory rather than delivery.
Posted on October 1, 2010 | 2 CommentsCompanies like innovation. But they won't be early adopters of an ill-defined and constantly changing mindset. They'll wait for it to calm down a bit, solidify and congeal. Then they'll slowly roll it out and gradually update it over time. Suggesting they take an ADHD approach of constant churn and ongoing rip and replace of the latest EA theories doesn't help them or us as practitioners.
Posted on September 30, 2010 | No CommentsEA, like the business and IT philosophies that underpin it, is constantly changing. If enterprise architecture is an architecture in which the system in question is the whole enterprise (including business processes, technologies, and information systems), then there will always be dynamism to it. These elements and components are under constant change.