Debate is raging across the web against the Enterprise App, what it stands for, what Enterprise even means and how can companies justify huge complicated projects and budgets on what are essentially the simplest of tasks. Here are some excellent conuterpoints;
- Chris Petrilli vs
Enterprisey Architecture - David Heinemeier Hansson vs Enterprise Astronauts
- James Robertson in Enterprisey-Ness Unbound
- Chris Petrilli in
Your pedestal is showing
From which I quote …
We work in environments where IT budgets are in the tens of millions, and in a number of cases, hundreds of millions of dollars.
Response from Chris,
This is laughable. Huge budgets are usually indicative of run-away architecture and absurd turf-wars and protectionism, not actual success. Most IT budgets I’ve been around could be shaved 30-70% by the judicious use of the word “no”, and the refusal to accept stock answers from astronauts and certification-wielding automatons.
For example, I watched a large government agency—who asked me to do an analysis of mail requirements for an organization of several hundred thousand users—choose the absolute worst option because it was the “industry standard”. It cost 14x more than the lowest cost in simple capital, and had a on-going support run-rate that was approximately 5-6x anything else. The defense was that it was what the “industry” had chosen. The reality is, it was chosen because budgets equal power, and people equal promotions.
no comments yet, add yours below