Ed, Kingsley:
Regarding the issue of tablets and phones for which the user does not have root access privileges, it is indeed a collision of business models, but not just between the “owner” of the phone and the phone/tablet service provider. It is also a collision between business model of the phone service provider and that of the enterprise for whom the phone “owner” works, which for traditional PC/Laptops (and some smart phones) used to provide the root access and associated admin/configuration services. There is also a collision between the phone “owner’s” notion of privacy and personal “information space”, and that of the enterprise he/she might work for, as well as that of the phone service provider(s)’ cloud services. The issue here is that the phone is viewed by the “owner” as more of a personal agent that a company provided “tool” – even if the phone is provided by the company. In a very real sense, the phone/tablet, serves as owner’s agent/representative on the “network”, even when the owner is not actually interacting with the phone. And the owner may keep information on that phone/tablet related to his/her enterprise responsibilities, but not necessarily subject to/compliant with any enterprise information standards. It may also contain access control information for access to external information/service providers such as Gmail, Amazon, and Facebook. This raises the issue of how best to “interoperate” between a user’s personal device (and personal “enterprise” boundary), and the enterprise boundaries of his/her employer, phone service provider, and other network accessible enterprises with which that phone owner has a relationship.
Hans
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ed Barkmeyer
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 5:33 PM
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Architectural considerations in Ontology Development
I mean: it's a bad thing to have apps as data silo vectors.
Yes. But in my world, many apps are intended to be the master data manager for some part of the enterprise. PLM systems want to be THE integrating software for engineering, but they are mostly just linked repositories. But at least someone realized that they need to be linked to all the CAx systems used in engineering, and an effort has been made to make that as painless as possible. 15 years ago, all those CAx systems were separate systems, and documentation management and workflow management and configuration and version management (PLM functions) were also separate systems. In a similar way ERP systems gathered up Finance, Procurement, HR, etc. So now what we have are big silos. I think there will always be silos in some form.
But the mere fact that the enterprise has a handful of big silos, rather than 25 smaller ones, makes the problem more tractable.
The problem with 25 linked silos is transaction and versioning coordination.
> It's so bad that individuals and enterprises are
> (today) purchasing computing devices en masse for which (as owners) they
> don't even posses 'root' privileges.
I think this means that corporations acquire and install lots of computers for workers who lack the privileges to do system administration. ...
I am referring to the fact that organizations and people are acquiring iOS5 tablets and phones for which they don't have 'root' access.
OH! OK. I agree that that can be considered a problem. But it is a collision of business models. The vendor wants to sell you a service, not a product. The product is simply a part of the service, and the supplier can modify the product to improve the service without physical contact with the widely dispersed customers. The customer thinks he has a product, and if the product can do more or different things from what the supplier provides, why can't the customer control the product and make those decisions? Because it isn't what he contracted for. This is mostly an education issue -- if you want to buy and control a product and negotiate for certain services, that is a different business model. And if ALL the service providers don't want to offer that option, the customer has no choice. To break that deadlock, you need a new technology that offers an opportunity for startups who can offer a product/service relationship the customer prefers.
The programmers are a handful of elves in the woods who have little influence on any decisions about corporate computing.
Not so since the advent of the Open Source era. An unintended consequence, so to speak.
I think you mistake the widespread use of open source software in research institutions and software houses for use of open source software in industry. If industry is using open source software, it is because the contractor they hired installed it.
They just get the job of installing the chosen products and making nice screen views for upper management.
Pre Web, maybe, In my experience these days -- it's all about code first and programming language oriented religious wars.
Again among the programmers in research institutions and software houses. Most of the population of the Webby exploders is far removed from real applications. We are only finally beginning to see major software houses and consulting firms using Web technologies in delivered "solutions", and their participation in the exploders is primarily information gathering.
As Steve Fenves, a former Mechanical Engineering chair at CMU, observed, "we are finally teaching engineers how to use computers instead of how to program computers".
I wish that was my experience. That's exactly how it should be, but not what I come across in my travels, unfortunately .
Well, Steve did say "finally". Since that was in 2008 or so, I think he probably meant "finally beginning to teach..."
> What happened to systems analysts, database designers, ontologists etc?
They are well paid consultants or "marketing support" staff for software houses. ...
That's how it should be, but the folks you describe aren't part of the major dialogs that occur on the Web, certainly not in the quarters that I frequent.
I stand by what I said above. The folks I describe are the ones in my circles. On most Webby exploders, they are lurkers. In some cases, they are forbidden by company rule to contribute.
> I believe applications are like fish and data like wine. The world (in the
> majority) still doesn't understand what data actually is, let alone the
> fundamental implications of such dangerous ignorance :-(
I agree 100%. But that has been so for 50 years.
Yes, but we have the eexponential effects kicking in these days. Thus, really bad stuff ends up affect a lot of people etc..
Well, yes, but certain major vendors and bad but appealing ideas have set the industry back 10 years or so at least twice since 1980, and that has negatively affected the industry from the outset of the Web. Then again the original design of typewriter keyboards 100 years ago negatively affects my keyboard productivity even now...
-Ed
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Systems Integration Division, Engineering Laboratory
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 Cel: +1 240-672-5800
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority."