johntification
|
A former co-worker, after many months of having to listen to me pontificate on various subjects, coined the term "johntification" to refer to my frequent monologues.
This blog contains entries on a variety of Science and Technology topics. For more entries specific to programming, please check out my java.net blog. Please accept what you read here with a grain of salt and a healthy dose of scepticism. |
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Business Process Musings
For the past few months I've been working with a very polished Business Process Management (BPM) suite from Lombardi Software , and I have to say that I am as happy as a clam. I feel like I have discovered a tool that I've been missing for at least 20 years, maybe longer, and I'm delighted.
It's hard to explain BPM to those who haven't experienced it, and to complicate matters it seems that each BPM vendor defines the space a bit differently, but I think that the dawning availability of high quality BPM suites is going to have an impact on business programming that will be just as significant as Object-Oriented programming was to programming at large. Quality BPM suites will usher in an era of Process Driven Design, and the wide-spread adoption of that paradigm is going to lead to a renaissance in business process engineering.
Okay, so you are now thinking that I've found another shiny penny, and that I'm vaulting back into hyper-enthusiast mode... Well... Not really. This is pretty much the same song that I've been singing for the past few years, but a different verse.
Remember SOA (Service Oriented Architecture)? Remember how folks couldn't really grok the difference between Services and CORBA and EJBs?
The answer is surprisingly simple... There really isn't much difference between Services and CORBA and EJBs in terms of functionality. The difference is in terms of "composability", and that's where BPM tools are making the difference. BPM tools give you the ability to compose (in a very agile fashion) multi-party process-oriented applications that can incorporate Services.
At this point you may be thinking that I'm describing BPEL (the Business Process Execution Language), but BPEL's only a small subset of what BPM offers (BPEL doesn't even handle human interactions yet).
BPM suites allow you to create multi-party process-oriented applications from scratch, deploy them to production, and maintain them over the long haul. You begin by diagramming the business process using a graphical notation such as the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN). The resultant Business Process Diagram (BPD) captures the highest level requirements in an executable process definition... This is one of the great things about BPM, the mapping between the requirement and the implementation couldn't be more straight-forward. The BPD can be stepped through with the business folks ad-infinitum to make sure that it's really correct, and together you can add in all of the (business) exception flows and caveats until everyone is happy.
Meanwhile, the activities that make up the process have to be fleshed out in detail. Some activities will require human interaction, others will be fully automated. Some activities will leverage pre-existing services, others will require new services... Good BPM suites contain tools for creating UI's, constructing light-weight services, and connecting to existing services (Web Services, Java objects, databases, packaged applications like SAP, etc.)... Most of the BPM suites that I'm familiar with are Java EE based, so what you're getting is a process-oriented veneer on top of all the Java functionality that you know and love.
Once the activities have been fleshed out and tested, the resultant application can be deployed to a Process Execution Engine (PXE) and made available to the masses... just like a Java EE application. But unlike a generic Java EE application, the PXE's generally provide a great deal of support for process-level instrumentation, and this is where Business Process Engineering comes into play.
Software Engineers generally care about infrastructure metrics. How fast is a query? What's the latency of response time for an incoming message? How much space is left on the hard drive?
Business Process Engineers deal at a different level. How long does it take to process an order? Where is the bottleneck in the process?
A good BPM suite (which includes a good PXE) allows the Business engineer to ask these questions directly. Each process can be instrumented in a natural fashion to obtain the answers that the Business engineer needs. If you've ever worked in an IT department you've probably had to scour through log files to answer a Business question that you thought they'd never ask. You've probably also had to develop some sort of ad-hoc instrumentation in your applications to capture metrics that might be useful someday, but will most likely never be evaluated.
BPM suites go a long way towards curing those headaches for you by coupling straightforward process instrumentation with focused reporting tools. Drag a few instrumentation points onto your BPD, create a simple report, and now your Business Process Engineers have the data that they need to really tune their processes.
None of what I am describing is really new, but the combination of these features into a truly usable environment is something that I hadn't experienced before, and you are probably going to have to experience it for yourself to truly grok the value. Unfortunately the Lombardi tool that I am using has no community edition, but there are some pretty good alternatives out there to sink your teeth in. I haven't had a chance to use them yet, but Intalio's Open Source BPM and JBoss's jBPM both look promising (and you can try them for free).
If you are a nuts and bolts infrastructure guy, or a game designer/simulation god, then BPM probably won't be your cup of tea... but if you're a business programmer, BPM is going to make your job a lot more fun.
¶ 10:32 AM 0 comments
For the past few months I've been working with a very polished Business Process Management (BPM) suite from Lombardi Software , and I have to say that I am as happy as a clam. I feel like I have discovered a tool that I've been missing for at least 20 years, maybe longer, and I'm delighted.
It's hard to explain BPM to those who haven't experienced it, and to complicate matters it seems that each BPM vendor defines the space a bit differently, but I think that the dawning availability of high quality BPM suites is going to have an impact on business programming that will be just as significant as Object-Oriented programming was to programming at large. Quality BPM suites will usher in an era of Process Driven Design, and the wide-spread adoption of that paradigm is going to lead to a renaissance in business process engineering.
Okay, so you are now thinking that I've found another shiny penny, and that I'm vaulting back into hyper-enthusiast mode... Well... Not really. This is pretty much the same song that I've been singing for the past few years, but a different verse.
Remember SOA (Service Oriented Architecture)? Remember how folks couldn't really grok the difference between Services and CORBA and EJBs?
The answer is surprisingly simple... There really isn't much difference between Services and CORBA and EJBs in terms of functionality. The difference is in terms of "composability", and that's where BPM tools are making the difference. BPM tools give you the ability to compose (in a very agile fashion) multi-party process-oriented applications that can incorporate Services.
At this point you may be thinking that I'm describing BPEL (the Business Process Execution Language), but BPEL's only a small subset of what BPM offers (BPEL doesn't even handle human interactions yet).
BPM suites allow you to create multi-party process-oriented applications from scratch, deploy them to production, and maintain them over the long haul. You begin by diagramming the business process using a graphical notation such as the Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN). The resultant Business Process Diagram (BPD) captures the highest level requirements in an executable process definition... This is one of the great things about BPM, the mapping between the requirement and the implementation couldn't be more straight-forward. The BPD can be stepped through with the business folks ad-infinitum to make sure that it's really correct, and together you can add in all of the (business) exception flows and caveats until everyone is happy.
Meanwhile, the activities that make up the process have to be fleshed out in detail. Some activities will require human interaction, others will be fully automated. Some activities will leverage pre-existing services, others will require new services... Good BPM suites contain tools for creating UI's, constructing light-weight services, and connecting to existing services (Web Services, Java objects, databases, packaged applications like SAP, etc.)... Most of the BPM suites that I'm familiar with are Java EE based, so what you're getting is a process-oriented veneer on top of all the Java functionality that you know and love.
Once the activities have been fleshed out and tested, the resultant application can be deployed to a Process Execution Engine (PXE) and made available to the masses... just like a Java EE application. But unlike a generic Java EE application, the PXE's generally provide a great deal of support for process-level instrumentation, and this is where Business Process Engineering comes into play.
Software Engineers generally care about infrastructure metrics. How fast is a query? What's the latency of response time for an incoming message? How much space is left on the hard drive?
Business Process Engineers deal at a different level. How long does it take to process an order? Where is the bottleneck in the process?
A good BPM suite (which includes a good PXE) allows the Business engineer to ask these questions directly. Each process can be instrumented in a natural fashion to obtain the answers that the Business engineer needs. If you've ever worked in an IT department you've probably had to scour through log files to answer a Business question that you thought they'd never ask. You've probably also had to develop some sort of ad-hoc instrumentation in your applications to capture metrics that might be useful someday, but will most likely never be evaluated.
BPM suites go a long way towards curing those headaches for you by coupling straightforward process instrumentation with focused reporting tools. Drag a few instrumentation points onto your BPD, create a simple report, and now your Business Process Engineers have the data that they need to really tune their processes.
None of what I am describing is really new, but the combination of these features into a truly usable environment is something that I hadn't experienced before, and you are probably going to have to experience it for yourself to truly grok the value. Unfortunately the Lombardi tool that I am using has no community edition, but there are some pretty good alternatives out there to sink your teeth in. I haven't had a chance to use them yet, but Intalio's Open Source BPM and JBoss's jBPM both look promising (and you can try them for free).
If you are a nuts and bolts infrastructure guy, or a game designer/simulation god, then BPM probably won't be your cup of tea... but if you're a business programmer, BPM is going to make your job a lot more fun.
¶ 10:32 AM 0 comments
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Friday, March 24, 2006
SpaceX Launch
3:00 pm, Austin time...
I am sitting here at my computer, watching a live webcast of the 1st SpaceX launch. They've had a few unplanned holds, so it looks like the launch won't be for another hour... 2:30 pm California (4:30 pm Austin) time instead of 1:00 pm.
I've got my fingers crossed...
The scene is surreal... There's a rather large missile standing in a small clearing, with a jungle of palm trees in the background. Once in awhile I can see people and golf carts going to and fro... Puffy clouds, but generally sunny, and there's obviously a nice breeze blowing.
3:16 pm, Austin time...
We just got a countdown to clock restart... the classic 5, 4, 3, 2, 1... but that's just to restart the clock...
3:23 pm, Austin time...
They are beginning to load propellant (LOX)...
3:44 pm, Austin time...
14868 lbs of fuel. The webcam view changed for a moment to show venting fuel.
4:04 pm, Austin time...
The view switched to another camera, one that was shaking in the wind. Hard to tell how fast the wind is really blowing.
4:12 pm, Austin time...
Ground winds are go for launch...
4:16 pm, Austin time...
T minus 15 minutes...
4:18 pm, Austin time...
The gantry support is slowly moving away...
4:20 pm, Austin time...
All stations verify ready to launch...
Cleared for launch...
T minus 10 minutes and counting...
4:26 pm, Austin time...
T minus 5 and counting...
4:31 pm, Austin time...
There she goes!!!
4:32 pm, Austin time...
Onboard camera view for a few seconds, then all went blank. I wonder what happened?
4:47 pm, Austin time...
Crap. MSNBC just announced that the rocket was destroyed on ascent ¶ 3:03 PM 0 comments
I am sitting here at my computer, watching a live webcast of the 1st SpaceX launch. They've had a few unplanned holds, so it looks like the launch won't be for another hour... 2:30 pm California (4:30 pm Austin) time instead of 1:00 pm.
I've got my fingers crossed...
The scene is surreal... There's a rather large missile standing in a small clearing, with a jungle of palm trees in the background. Once in awhile I can see people and golf carts going to and fro... Puffy clouds, but generally sunny, and there's obviously a nice breeze blowing.
3:16 pm, Austin time...
We just got a countdown to clock restart... the classic 5, 4, 3, 2, 1... but that's just to restart the clock...
3:23 pm, Austin time...
They are beginning to load propellant (LOX)...
3:44 pm, Austin time...
14868 lbs of fuel. The webcam view changed for a moment to show venting fuel.
4:04 pm, Austin time...
The view switched to another camera, one that was shaking in the wind. Hard to tell how fast the wind is really blowing.
4:12 pm, Austin time...
Ground winds are go for launch...
4:16 pm, Austin time...
T minus 15 minutes...
4:18 pm, Austin time...
The gantry support is slowly moving away...
4:20 pm, Austin time...
All stations verify ready to launch...
Cleared for launch...
T minus 10 minutes and counting...
4:26 pm, Austin time...
T minus 5 and counting...
4:31 pm, Austin time...
There she goes!!!
4:32 pm, Austin time...
Onboard camera view for a few seconds, then all went blank. I wonder what happened?
4:47 pm, Austin time...
Crap. MSNBC just announced that the rocket was destroyed on ascent ¶ 3:03 PM 0 comments
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Update on China's Space Plans...
China has bowed to economic reality and revised their time table for a lunar landing.
On one hand, I am glad that China's government is balancing its desire for space exploration against more pressing concerns, but on the other hand I'm a bit disappointed in the new time line. Fifteen years is a long time.
More and more, I am prone to bet that the next visitors to the moon are going to be as a result of commercial rather than governmental ventures. If the SpaceX Falcon launches successfully in a few weeks, I think that we'll see commercial "return to the moon" timelines on par with the new Chinese plans. ¶ 8:56 AM 1 comments
On one hand, I am glad that China's government is balancing its desire for space exploration against more pressing concerns, but on the other hand I'm a bit disappointed in the new time line. Fifteen years is a long time.
More and more, I am prone to bet that the next visitors to the moon are going to be as a result of commercial rather than governmental ventures. If the SpaceX Falcon launches successfully in a few weeks, I think that we'll see commercial "return to the moon" timelines on par with the new Chinese plans. ¶ 8:56 AM 1 comments
Saturday, February 25, 2006
NASA seems to be stuck
NASA's plans to get back to the moon are sadly familiar. When watching the Mission To Moon animation, I got the distinct feeling of deja vu... as if I was watching a flawed historical video of the Apollo moon shots rather than any plans for the future.
I am not alone in this feeling. Buzz Aldrin recently told Popular Mechanics:
I don't think that NASA "gets it".
Getting to the moon, or getting to Mars for that matter, is not really the goal. The goal is to establish routine access to space, and practical access throughout the solar system.
Buzz Aldrin defintitely "gets it", as you will see if you look at his plans for getting to Mars.
Can NASA "get it", or is NASA a lost cause? ¶ 10:49 AM 0 comments
I am not alone in this feeling. Buzz Aldrin recently told Popular Mechanics:
"NASA's latest thinking for a manned Mars mission is basically the Apollo program writ large: a massive disposable spacecraft that must be boosted from Earth to interplanetary velocity, and then slowed back down to alight on Mars. This flight plan has a huge energy requirement that translates directly into size, complexity and cost. Because each mission would be so extremely expensive, it's all too likely that such a program will lead to the kind of short-term "footprints and flagpoles" thinking that eventually killed Apollo."
I don't think that NASA "gets it".
Getting to the moon, or getting to Mars for that matter, is not really the goal. The goal is to establish routine access to space, and practical access throughout the solar system.
Buzz Aldrin defintitely "gets it", as you will see if you look at his plans for getting to Mars.
Can NASA "get it", or is NASA a lost cause? ¶ 10:49 AM 0 comments
Saturday, January 28, 2006
Gas To Liquid Technology - Clean Fuel?
Gas To Liquid (GTL) is shorthand for the process of converting natural gas to a liquid that can be used as fuel.
There are a couple of advantages to this technology:
GTL is not new technology, the Fischer-Tropsch process originally developed in the 1920s to convert coal to liquid fuel can easily be adapted to convert natural gas to liquid fuel. Renewed interest in GTL is primarilly due to our increasing need for cleaner fuels.
We always have to take claims of "cleaner fuel" with a grain of salt; burning a synthetic fuel may be cleaner, but the process to create the fuel must always be scrutinized for "bad" side effects, Some synthetic fuels may require more energy to produce than they deliver. Some techniques for producing sythetic fuels may result in harmful byproducts or pollution. We always have to look at the whole process, not just the end results.
That said, it looks like GTL might play a big part in meeting our future energy needs. There are reports of huge quantities of Methane Hydrates in our ocean depths, and GTL could be a good option for converting these gaseous resources to a more usable liquid form.
Something to keep your eye on... ¶ 10:07 AM 0 comments
There are a couple of advantages to this technology:
- Liquid fuel is a lot easier to handle, store and distribute than gaseous fuel
- The fuel produced by this process should burn a lot cleaner than fuel such as diesel from crude oil
GTL is not new technology, the Fischer-Tropsch process originally developed in the 1920s to convert coal to liquid fuel can easily be adapted to convert natural gas to liquid fuel. Renewed interest in GTL is primarilly due to our increasing need for cleaner fuels.
We always have to take claims of "cleaner fuel" with a grain of salt; burning a synthetic fuel may be cleaner, but the process to create the fuel must always be scrutinized for "bad" side effects, Some synthetic fuels may require more energy to produce than they deliver. Some techniques for producing sythetic fuels may result in harmful byproducts or pollution. We always have to look at the whole process, not just the end results.
That said, it looks like GTL might play a big part in meeting our future energy needs. There are reports of huge quantities of Methane Hydrates in our ocean depths, and GTL could be a good option for converting these gaseous resources to a more usable liquid form.
Something to keep your eye on... ¶ 10:07 AM 0 comments
Monday, January 16, 2006
Space dreams
I grew up during the moon race, and just like all of my childhood friends, I wanted to be an astronaut.
I'm not sure when I gave up on this career goal, but somewhere along the way I came to cynically view astronauts as overly-educated-under-achievers. I don't mean to be harsh, but the relationship between earning a Phd and performing housekeeping chores on the (perpetually under construction) International Space Station seems tenuous at best.
Perhaps this negative attitude really came from my zero-chance of becoming an astronaut due to my horrendous eyesight and my disdain for NASA's bureaucracy, but for whatever reason I long ago put aside my childhood dream, got a "real" job, and abandoned any hope that I would ever go into space.
Perhaps I was a bit premature...
New Mexico is building a spaceport just north of Las Cruces, and Virgin Galactic plans to launch paying customers from that location starting in 2008. I haven't got $200,000 in disposable income to buy a seat, but I could always win the lottery ;-)
Virgin's plans are currently for sub-orbital flights, but their partner, Scaled Composites, is involved in numerous ventures to finally open space for "the rest of us". I doubt that I will ever make it, but perhaps average people will visit the moon if companies such as Transformational Space, Blue Origin and SpaceX succeed.
It's nice to dream... ¶ 10:08 AM 0 comments
I'm not sure when I gave up on this career goal, but somewhere along the way I came to cynically view astronauts as overly-educated-under-achievers. I don't mean to be harsh, but the relationship between earning a Phd and performing housekeeping chores on the (perpetually under construction) International Space Station seems tenuous at best.
Perhaps this negative attitude really came from my zero-chance of becoming an astronaut due to my horrendous eyesight and my disdain for NASA's bureaucracy, but for whatever reason I long ago put aside my childhood dream, got a "real" job, and abandoned any hope that I would ever go into space.
Perhaps I was a bit premature...
New Mexico is building a spaceport just north of Las Cruces, and Virgin Galactic plans to launch paying customers from that location starting in 2008. I haven't got $200,000 in disposable income to buy a seat, but I could always win the lottery ;-)
Virgin's plans are currently for sub-orbital flights, but their partner, Scaled Composites, is involved in numerous ventures to finally open space for "the rest of us". I doubt that I will ever make it, but perhaps average people will visit the moon if companies such as Transformational Space, Blue Origin and SpaceX succeed.
It's nice to dream... ¶ 10:08 AM 0 comments
