service oriented architecture - macos...

Megatrends in Information Technology

Software Engineering Linkages

Len Cayetano

Personal Information Engineer at Kyocera 20 Plus Years in Software Engineering

Embedded Systems, SOA, Internet, Storage, Corporate Tax Software, Program Management, Engineering Management

Double Alumnus, University of Southern California MS Software Engineering, Viterbi School of Engineering MBA International Business, Marshall School of Business

Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles MS Computer Science

DePaul University, Chicago BS, Dual Major in Mathematics & Computer Science with Honors

October 28, 2013 Megatrends in IT & Software Engineering Linkages-2

Megatrends & Driving Forces in Information Technology

Technologies to Actualize Megatrends

Embedded Systems

Linkages to Software Engineering

AGENDA


USC VITERBISCHOOL ofENGINEERING

CSCI 510 Software EngineeringEconomics

Essential Objectives

1. Discuss Megatrends that have implications for the future of Software Engineering

2. Review essential technologies which will enable organizations to exploit these trends

3. Develop an understanding of the importance of embedded systems for future products

4. Review relevant Software Engineering theory


SECTION 1

MEGATRENDS AND DRIVING FORCES IN IT


Gartner’s Strategic Outlook for 2020

References: Gartner, 2013. Published by Michael Cooney in Infoworld. See [60]

Total economic value add for “Internet of Things” will be $1.9 trillion dollars in 2020

Benefit and impact wide range of industries including healthcare, retail, transportations

There will be up to 30 billion devices connected with unique

IP addresses

2020

2018

2013


Four Powerful Driving Forces (Gartner)

Driving forces will: Continue to drive change and create new opportunities Create high demand for advanced programmable infrastructure Programmable infrastructure will need to execute at web-scale



MOBILE CLOUDSOCIAL MEDIA INFORMATION

Gartner’s 2014 Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends

1. Mobile Device Diversity & Management2. Mobile Apps and Applications3. Software-defined Anything (SDx)4. Smart Machines5. 3-D Printing 6. The Internet of Everything7. Hybrid Cloud and IT as Service Broker8. Cloud/Client Architecture9. The Era of Personal Cloud10. Web-scale IT



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #1 Mobile Device Diversity & Management

Growing variety of devices, computing styles, user contexts, and interaction paradigms

Doubling and tripling of the size of the mobile workforce

Need for enterprise policies on employee-owned hardware usage Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) OK?

Companies need to set expectations Balance flexibility with confidentiality and

privacy requirements



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #2 Mobile Apps and Applications

Apps will continue to grow faster than applications Apps are smaller, more targeted, while a larger

application is more comprehensive Improved JavaScript performance will begin to

push HTML5 and browser as a mainstream app development environment

Developers should create UI models that include richer voice and video that improve connectivity

Developers should look for ways to snap together apps to create larger applications

Developers should find ways to leverage intent, inferred from emotion and actions Goal is to motivate changes in end-user behavior

Accept that no single tool will be optimal Several will have to be used for development



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #3 Software-defined Anything (SDx)

Software-defined anything (SDx) incorporates various initiatives which share similar visions

Very similar to OpenStack, OpenFlow, the Open Compute Project, and OpenRack

OpenStack is a cloud computing project aimed at providing an infrastructure as a service (IaaS) It is free and open-source software released under the terms of the

Apache License Industry leaders with similar interests participate

Examples of SDx include: SDN (Software-defined networking ) SDDC (Software-defined data center ) SDS (Software-defined storage) SDI (Software-defined Infrastructure)



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #3 Software-defined Anything (SDx)

Continued Evolution of SDx technology silos and consortiums will:

Create emerging standards and bridging capabilities to benefit portfolios

Challenge individual technology suppliers to demonstrate their commitment to true interoperability standards within their specific domains

Issues & Concerns Vendors’ interpretations of SDx definitions may be anything but

open Vendors who dominate a sector may reluctantly want to abide

by standards that have the potential to:Lower margins and open broader competitive opportunitiesBenefit consumer because of simplicity, cost reduction and

consolidation efficiency



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #4 Smart Machines

Through 2020, the smart machine era will blossom There will be a proliferation of:

Contextually aware, intelligent personal assistants, smart advisers (e.g. IBM Watson)

Advanced global industrial systems Public availability of early examples of autonomous

vehicles The smart machine era will be the most disruptive in

the history of IT New systems are now finally emerging that will fulfill

some of the earliest visions for what information technologies might or could accomplish

Machines will do what we thought only people could do and machines could not!



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #4 Smart Machines

Highly recommend book by John E. Kelly and Steve Hamm

Thesis is that era of cognitive systems is here!

Machines will do more than calculations

They will sense, learn, reason and interact naturally with people in powerful ways

Will create a new culture of innovation



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #5 3-D Printing

Very expensive “additive manufacturing” devices have been around for 20 years

Worldwide shipments of 3D printers are expected to grow 75 percent in 2014

Doubling of unit shipments expected in 2015 Market for devices ranging from $50,000 to

$500, and with commensurate material and build capabilities, is nascent yet growing rapidly

The consumer market hype has made organizations aware of the following: 3D printing is a real, viable and cost-effective means to

reduce costs Potential for improved designs Streamlined prototyping



http://www.networkworld.com/slideshow/113788/the-worst-of-3d-printing-hype.html

2014 Strategic Technology Trend #6 The Internet of Everything The Internet is expanding beyond PCs and mobile

devices Internet is expanding into:

Enterprise assets such as field equipment Consumer items such as cars and televisions

Issues for most enterprises and vendors Most enterprises and technology vendors have yet to

explore the possibilities of an expanded Internet Most are not operationally or organizationally ready

Imagine digitizing the most important products, services and assets!



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #6 The Internet of Everything

Your Body


Your Home

Your City

Industry

EnvironmentReferences: Gartner, 2013. Published by Michael Cooney in Infoworld. See [60] Also see http://postscapes.com/internet-of-things-examples/

2014 Strategic Technology Trend #7 Hybrid Cloud and IT as Service Broker

Bringing together personal clouds and external private cloud services is an imperative

Enterprises should design private cloud services with a hybrid future in mind Need to make sure future integration/interoperability is possible

Hybrid cloud services can be composed in many ways Could vary from relatively static to very dynamic

Managing this composition will often be the responsibility of something filling the role of cloud service broker (CSB) CSB should handle aggregation, integration and customization of services

Enterprises that are expanding into hybrid cloud computing from private cloud services are taking on the CSB role



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #8 Cloud/Client Architecture

Cloud/client computing models are shifting Essentials of the cloud/client architecture

The client is a rich application running on an Internet-connected device The server is a set of application services hosted in an increasingly elastically

scalable cloud computing platform The cloud is the control point and system of record Applications can span multiple client devices The client environment may be a native application or browser-based

Increasingly complex demands of mobile users will drive apps to demand increasing amounts of server-side computing and storage capacity

Need to exploit the intelligence and storage of the client device: After all there are robust capabilities in many mobile devices Need to manage issue of increased demand on networks Cost of networks and the need to manage bandwidth use will create incentives to:

Minimize the cloud application computing and storage footprint Exploit the intelligence and storage of the client device



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #9 The Era of Personal Cloud

The Personal Cloud era will mark a power shift away from devices toward services

In this new world The specifics of devices will become less important for the organization to

worry about However, devices will still be necessary

Users will use a collection of devices, with the PC remaining one of many options No one device will be the primary hub Rather, the personal cloud will take on that role

Access to the cloud and the content stored or shared from the cloud will be: Managed and secured, rather than solely focusing on the device itself



http://www.networkworld.com/slideshow/120475/9-free-personal-clouds.html

2014 Strategic Technology Trend #10 Web-scale IT

Web-scale IT is a pattern of global-class computing that delivers the capabilities of large cloud service providers within an enterprise IT setting Done by rethinking positions across several dimensions

Large cloud services providers such as Amazon, Google, Facebook, etc., are re-inventing the way IT in which IT services can be delivered (Need to imitate)

Their capabilities go beyond scale in terms of sheer size to also include scale as it pertains to speed and agility If enterprises want to keep pace, then they need to emulate the

architectures, processes and practices of these exemplary cloud providers

Gartner calls the combination of all of these elements Web-scale IT



2014 Strategic Technology Trend #10 Web-scale IT (Continued)

Web-scale IT looks to change the IT value chain in a systemic fashion

Data centers are designed with an industrial engineering perspective Perspective that looks for every opportunity to reduce cost and waste

This goes beyond re-designing facilities to be more energy efficient Need to also include in-house design of key hardware components such as

servers, storage and networks

Web-oriented architectures allows developers to build very flexible and resilient systems that recover from failure more quickly



“ Always On” or “Connected” Society

Term created by Gartner to refer to the prediction that 75% of EU and US citizens will have the option of immediate access to e-services for over 80% of their non-working time by 2007

“Always On” society will evolve as a consequence of widespread, easy access to sufficient wireless network bandwidth

Evolution will also result from availability of mobile devices capable of exploiting this bandwidth at affordable network fees

Trend towards mobility will become an integral part of society A mobile device will become a personal companion Personal mobile devices will increase in processing power,

networking capabilities and battery capacity Personal devices will evolve to advanced personal platforms Will reinforce tendency to move from the following work scenarios:

“fixed time” to “anytime” “fixed place” to “anywhere”

References: Gerhard Wiehler, 2004 , See [54, 55]


SECTION 2

TECHNOLOGIES TO ACTUALIZE MEGATRENDS

AND DRIVING FORCES


Technologies Making Products Based on Megatrends Possible Gartner participates in the rich marketplace of ideas

Attempts to predict what the future of IT will look like

Leverage work of other technical thought leaders Gerhard Wiehler and others to discuss “HOW?”

Goal is to discuss concrete technological mechanisms through which Gartner’s predictions can be actualized


Comparison of 2 Building BlocksJ2EE Environment & .NET Framework


J2EE Environment

ComponentBased

ApplicationWeb

ServiceOther

Application

SwingJava

ServerPages

JDBC MoreEnterprise

JavaBeans

Standard Java Packages

Java Virtual Machine (VM)

Windows, Unix, Linux, Others

.NET Framework

ComponentBased

ApplicationWeb

ServiceOther

Application

WindowsForms ASP.NET ADO.NET MoreEnterprise

Services

.NET Framework Class Library

Common Language Runtime

Windows


Mobile Client Architectures for Java and .NET Environments


J2ME

MID Profile

PDA Profile

OtherProfile

CLDCConnected Limited

DeviceConfigurations

Symbian, Windows Mobile, Linux, Palm OS, Blackberry, IOS,etc

Game Profile

CDCConnected Device

Configurations

KVM CVM

Applications

.NET Compact Framework

Web Services Web Forms

Windows CE .NET (Windows Mobile)


Applications

Base Class Library

Data Access and XML


Reduction from Large to Smaller Mobile Environment: Case 1 (Java)


J2EE Environment

ComponentBased

ApplicationWeb

ServiceOther

Application

SwingJava

ServerPages

JDBC MoreEnterprise

JavaBeans

Standard Java Packages

Java Virtual Machine (VM)

Windows, Unix, Linux, Others

J2ME

MID Profile

PDA Profile

OtherProfile

CLDCConnected Limited

DeviceConfigurations

Symbian,Windows Mobile,Linux, Palm OS, Blackberry, IOS,etc.

Game Profile

CDCConnected Device

Configurations

KVM CVM

Applications


Reduction from Large to Smaller Mobile Environment: Case 2 (.NET)


.NET Framework

ComponentBased

ApplicationWeb

ServiceOther

Application

WindowsForms ASP.NET ADO.NET MoreEnterprise

Services

.NET Framework Class Library


Windows

.NET Compact Framework

Web Services Web Forms

Windows CE .NET (Windows Mobile)


Applications

Base Class Library

Data Access and XML


Summary of Reduction from Large to Smaller Mobile Environment



Example of Mobile Enterprise Portal

October 28, 2013 Megatrends in IT & Software Engineering Linkages-31References: Gerhard Wiehler, 2004 , See [54, 55]

DevicesDevices MarkupMarkup ProtocolProtocol NetworkNetwork Enterprise PortalEnterprise Portal

GatewaysGateways Service/ApplicationService/Application

●HTML

●XHTMLBasic

●WML

●TinyHTML

●cHTML(I -Mode)

●VoiceXML

●WAP

●HTTP

●SMTP

●SMS

●GSM

●GPRS

●3G/UMTS

●WLAN

●Voice

●WAP-Gateway

●WebServer

●VoiceServer

MobileEnterprisePortal

Email

CorporateDirectory

StandardApplication(e.g. ERP)

Field ServiceApplicationDepartmental Service

Location-Based Services

Mobile Access

Web Access


Wireless Application Protocols (WAP) Architecture


WSP Wireless Session Protocol

WAP Wireless Application ProtocolsWDP Wireless Datagram ProtocolWTLS Wireless Transport Layer SecurityWTP Wireless Transaction Protocol

Internet ProtocolsTCP/IPHTTPTLS/SSL

WML Wireless Markup Language


SECTION 3

EMBEDDED SYSTEMS


Driving Forces for Continued Growth in Embedded Systems

Comprise biggest share on the integrated circuit market

Become more powerful every year with evolution of microprocessor technology

Becoming more sophisticated, blurring frontier between computers & appliances

Growing similarity between embedded and desktop apps

Similarity is enforcing need to connect devices through TCP/IP networks

Increasing trends of bigger integration between different microprocessed appliances

Moving toward an “Internet of Everything”

References: See [54, 55, 60]


Examples of Embedded Systems

Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=embedded+systems+examples&hl=en&qscrl=1&rlz=1T4NDKB_enUS538US538&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=k2hmUqiPBOWTiAKNt4CoCw&sqi=2&ved=0CDwQsAQ&biw=1093&bih=490


Overview of an Embedded System All use form of non-volatile RAM

Flash memory, EPROM, ROM All use some form of RAM Most have communications

interfaces to a development host Several embedded platforms

available to host Web Services e.g. Netburner, RabbitCore, SHIP

Several development toolkits J2ME (Java Platform, Micro Edition) ETTK (Effort among multiple IBM labs) eSOAP (Light implementation of SOAP) gSOAP (Cross-platform open source)

CPU

ROM

RAM

Non-volatile Memory Clock I /O

CPU

ROM

RAM

Non-volatile Memory Clock I /O

A Typical Embedded SystemSource: See Reference [54], Page 3.

SHIP BoardSource: See Reference [54], Page 3.

References: See [ 54]


SECTION 3B

AN EXAMPLE OF SOA IN EMBEDDED SYSTEMS


What is SOA? First, Understand “Tight Coupling”

Data and functionality typically reside on more than one, often disparate systems

Applications need to be able to “talk to each other”

Status quo: Proprietary or custom communication interfaces between applications

Source: H. Taylor, “Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) 101 ‘What’s Hype, What’s Real?’“, Juniper Networks, Inc.,2007.


Challenges with Tight Coupling It is costly to maintain Slow and costly to change Consequence: Cost and complexity of managing and changing a

tightly coupled architecture makes business agility difficult IT can’t keep up with business needs, but it’s not their fault Does not support REUSE!

Reuse is a challenge industry wanted to solve for many years! Evolution of reuse solutions reflects industry’s concerns

Header files, inheritance and polymorphism at the object level, frameworks

CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) Microsoft COM (Component Object Model) EAI (Enterprise Application Integration ) Web Services

CORBA and COM will be explored in a little more detail



CORBA: Technology to Facilitate Reuse Tier1 belongs to:

Traditional Web browsers Web-centric applications

Java applets, Java beans

Tier 2 runs on any server that can support HTTP and CORBA clients CORBA objects, like EJBs,

encapsulate business logic

Tier 3 consists of almost anything a CORBA object can accessThe 3-Tier CORBA/Java Object Web.

Source: Client/Server Programming with JAVA and CORBA Second Edition by R. Orfali and D. Harkey, p. 45.


COM: Technology to Facilitate Reuse Brief Overview of COM

Microsoft COM (Component Object Model) enables software components to communicate

COM is used by developers to create re-usable software components, link components together to build applications, and take advantage of Windows services

COM objects can be created with a variety of programming languages including object-oriented languages such as C++

The family of COM technologies includes COM+, Distributed COM (DCOM) and ActiveX® Controls.

The .NET Framework provides bi-directional interoperability with COM Enables COM-based applications to use .NET components and .NET

applications to use COM components

Reasons CORBA, COM, EAI and others did not work Lack of open standards Proprietary components

Now examine SOA as a technology

Source: http://www.microsoft.com/com


SOA: The Ideal of Open Interoperability (Loose Coupling)

SOA – A Definition An IT architecture composed

of software that has been exposed as “Services” – i.e. invoked on demand using a standard protocol.

“Web Services” – software available as a “service” using Internet protocols.

One software application talking to another using a standards-based (i.e. non-proprietary) language over a standards-based communication protocol.

An IT architecture that enables “loose coupling” of applications



Core SOA Definitions XML – Extensible Markup Language SOAP – Simple Object Access Protocol WSDL – Web Services Description Language UDDI - Universal Description, Discovery and Integration ESB – Enterprise Service Bus Key Concepts

Network Transparency Virtualized endpoint Self-describing software Universally discoverable software Universally understood software Machine to machine interaction

Standards Organizations (World Wide Web Consortium)W3C (www.w3.org) Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information

Standards(OASIS) (www.oasis-open.org)



http://www.w3.org/

http://www.oasis-open.org/

SOA Usage & Supporting Platforms SOA Usage

B2B Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) Application to Application Government Embedded Systems SaaS (Software as a Service) Cloud Computing (Computing/Infrastructure as a Service)

Major Players in SOA Space IBM: WebSphere SOA Product Suite Oracle: WebLogic Oracle: Fusion Middleware Microsoft: .NET SAP: NetWeaver



What Makes Web Services Appealing?CORBA JAVA RMI ONC(SUN)

RPCWEB SERVICES

1. Data Encoding Common Data Representation(CDR)

Serialized Java/CDR

Extended Data Representation (XDR)

XML (WS-I doc-literal, SOAP Encoding)

2. Message Format IIOP (GIOP) RMI Protocol/IIOP

RPC RMS SOAP

3. Transport Protocol TCP TCP UDP TCP HTTP

4. Description Language CORBA IDL Java Interface/Class

RPC IDL WSDL

5. Discovery Mechanism COS Naming RMI Registry Undefined UDDI

6. Invocation Method CORBA RMI Java RMI (method call)

RPC Undefined

Source: See [ 56], Page 4.



Example: Business to Business, External Provider

Two enterprises: A & B 4 Web Services 3 WS from external providers 4 Scenarios

Scenario 1 (S1): Enterprise B’s Purchasing accesses

Enterprise A’s Inventory Web ServiceScenario 2 (S2): Enterprise A’s Accounting accesses

Payment Web ServiceScenario 3 (S3): Both enterprises’ security access the

same authentication Web serviceScenario 4 (S4): Enterprise B’s Production accesses

Logistics Web ServiceSource: Mobility, Security and Web Services: Technologies and Service-Oriented Architectures for a new Era of IT Solutions by Gerhard Wiehler, p. 101.

S1

S3S2 S4

Issues/Constraints in Implementing Web Services in Embedded Devices

Developers typically use an embedded Web Server to remotely access services running on their embedded device

Embedded Web Server should also be extended to serve as a container for Web Services

Container should be able to load Web Services implemented in C and C++ C/C++ most common language for embedded

systems Container should be able to load WS

implemented in embedded Java

Source: See [ 56], Page 4.


Issues/Constraints in Implementing Web Services in Embedded Device

Web Server Footprint Web Server that serves as container for WS must

be carefully designed/modified to make optimal use of memory

A popular Web server like Apache would, in most cases, be too large

Data Marshaling Encoding and decoding routines used to marshal

or unmarshal XML encoded data within SOAP messages must be carefully optimized

Need to strike the correct balance of space and time utilization

Need to avoid consuming too much ROM, RAM, or processor time

Optimized C language implementation of the marshaling-unmarshaling library provides a good solution

Reference: See [ 56].


Issues/Constraints in Implementing Web Services in Embedded Device

Implementation Language Most solutions for containers and services

depend on Java A native (compiled) language

implementation doesn’t consume additional ROM memory Can facilitate the deployment of Java clients or

services Modularity

Many solutions try to create modular designs with a clean separation of interfaces

Interdependencies between modules frequently exist, increasing the code footprint

An embedded implementation must employ strict layering to eliminate penalties for capabilities. E.g. SSL, UDDI may not be required



DEVICE TO BUSINESS EXAMPLE


SECTION 3C

Device to Business Examples Embedded systems are typically located in environments

where: It is inconvenient to implement application provisioning Difficult to obtain diagnostic information & other operational data Web services make these activities manageable remotely plus

over the Web Ex. 1: An automotive telematics device could:

Wirelessly connect to a telematics service provider and Fetch route updates for turn-by-turn navigation

Ex 2: Courier companies could perform specialized tasks Fleet tracking Vehicle diagnostics

Ex. 3: A retail chain could: Deploy HVAC (Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning) control devices

in hundreds of stores Securely control all those devices over the Internet, from a central

locationReferences: See [ 56]


Requirements for Device-to-Business Integration Infrastructure

Web Services Support Common denominator for all participating devices in SOA

Event Driven Architecture (EDA) E.g. on shop floor, thousands of events are generated during normal

operation Service Lifecycle Management

Need to administrate services during entire lifecycle Start/stop services Configuration & parameterization of running services

Business Process Modeling Device-level events can be actively integrated & evaluated during

execution of business process Intermittent Connected Assets

Oftentimes devices connect only occasionally to the back-end system or suffer sudden disconnections

Business Process Monitoring Deals with proactive and process-oriented monitoring of company’s

core business processesReference: See [ 55].


Requirements for Device-to-Business Integration Infrastructure

Alerting Important especially for mission-critical devices

Multi-faceted Enterprise Services Need to filter information from devices into back-end services E.g. Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO)

Standardized Communication & Information Exchange OASIS standards Devices Profile for Web Services (DPWS)

Defines a minimal set of implementation constraints to enable secure Web Service messaging, discovery, description, and eventing on resource-constrained devices

B2MML (Business to Manufacturing Markup Language) Access to Device Status

Rich interface to device status is necessary Options that can configure or even allow code to be downloaded to

the device are required



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Service

Sample Architecture for Device to Business

Goal is to integrate device-level services Integrate with enterprise

software Enterprise software uses

Web Services technology 3 Layers

1. Device Layer 2. Composition Layer 3. Middleware Layer





Architecture for Device to Business

Sample Architecture:Device Layer Devices of manufacturing &

process automation shop floor are represented in the device layer

Smart networked devices expose functionality directly as Web Services

Use DPWS, DPWS-enabled controllers

Could use legacy system connectors

Messages may be exchanged via peer-to-peer network

Landscape of devices highly heterogeneous



Sample Architecture:Composition Layer Intermediate systems that

provide compound services Compound services by

combining capabilities of smart devices

Compound systems are flexible & agile

Also provides connection of legacy devices that do not provide Web Services support



Sample Architecture: Middleware Layer Connects device layer and

composite layer with the application layer

Provides Device Abstraction Connects devices with enterprise

applications in transparent way Provides facilities for

asynchronous and synchronous communications

Propagation of events and connecting to different device protocols

Provides legacy support to support legacy devices

Provides System Management Service Lifecycle management Monitoring of device status Service discovery



Sample Architecture:Application Layer Contains applications traditionally

connected to lower layers E.g. Supervision of shop floor, ERP

Also apps that do not connect to lower layers E.g. Business applications such as

ERP E.g. Operational Management

Enterprise services available to support enterprise applications

Business Process Engine processes business processes

Management Interfaces provides supervision of shop floor



SECTION 4THOUGHTS ON SOFTWARE ENGINEERING ECONOMICS


Operational Benefits of Reuse In resource-limited situations,

every organization must decide how to allocate its limited resources to produce a certain set of outputs [11]

Production-Possibility Frontier Curve (W.C. Lim) Shows the organization’s

menu of choices for quality and productivity

A concave curve viewed from the origin

Assumes that the resources of the organization are fully and efficiently employed [11] Tradeoff between quality and productivity.

Source: W.C. Lim, Managing Software Reuse, Prentice Hall, 1998, p. 108


Operational Benefits of Reuse With reuse, note shift of

the production-possibility frontier to the right

Illustrates that with reuse a higher level of quality can be achieved with the same level of productivity

Similarly, a higher level of productivity can be achieved with the same level of quality

Simultaneous increase in quality and productivity

Reuse allows increased quality and /or productivity levels.Source: W.C. Lim, Managing Software Reuse, Prentice Hall, 1998, p. 109


SECTION 5

SUMMARY


Final Thoughts1. There are significant trends and driving forces that will

affect the future of engineering and indeed society2. Smart Machines may be the next “disruptive”

technology although there are competing and complementary driving forces

3. Software engineering will continue to play an increasing role in the advancement of technology

4. Mobility is a trend that will impact the continued proliferation of embedded devices

5. We have to be concerned about privacy & security6. SOA/Web Services will continue to play a significant role


REFERENCES


References1. B.W. Boehm and C. Gacek, “Composing Components: How Does One Detect Potential Architectural Mismatches?,” USC Center

for Software Engineering, Los Angeles, CA, 1999.2. B.W. Boehm and W.L. Scherlis, “Megaprogramming,” Proceedings of the DARPA Software technology Conference, April 1992

(available via USC Center for Software Engineering, Los Angeles, CA, 90089-0781).3. B.W. Boehm, Software Engineering Economics, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1981.4. B.W. Boehm, C. Abts, A.W. Brown, S. Chulani, B.K. Clark, E. Horowitz, R. Madachy, D. Reifer, and B. Steece, Software Cost

Estimation with COCOMO II, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 2000.5. Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute (M.C. Pauk, C.V. Weber, B. Curtis, and M.B. Chrissis). The

Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process, Addison-Wesley, 1999.6. F. DeRemer and H.H. Kron. “Programming –in-the-large versus programming-in-the-small,” IEEE Transactions on Software

Engineering, SE-2(2), June 1976, pp. 80-86.7. D. Garlan, R. Allen, and J. Ockerbloom. “Architectural Mismatch: Why Reuse Is So Hard,” Software, IEEE Computer Society,

November 1995, pp. 17-26.8. E.M. Hall, Managing Risk: Methods for Software Systems Development, Addison-Wesley, 1998.9. W.S. Humphrey, Managing the Software Process, Addison-Wesley, 1989.10. I.M. Jacobson and P. Jonsson, Software Reuse: Architecture, Process, and Organization for Business Success, Addison-Wesley,

1997.11. W.C. Lim, Managing Software Reuse, Prentice Hall, 199812. S. Vinoski, “CORBA: Integrating Diverse Applications Within Distributed Heterogeneous Environments,” IEEE Transactions on

Software Engineering, 1996. 13. D. J. Reifer, Making the Software Business Case, Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 2000.14. J.S. Poulin, Measuring Software Reuse: Principles, Practices, and Economic Models, Addison-Wesley, 1997.15. D.J. Reifer, Practical Software Reuse, John Wiley & Sons, 1997.16. C.K. Prahalad and G. Hatmel “The Core Competence of the Corporation,” Harvard Business Review, May-June, 1990.17. B.W. Boehm, “Software Risk Management: Principles and Practices,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, January

1991, pp. 32-41.18. M. Shaw and D. Garlan, Software Architecture: Perspectives On An Emerging Discipline, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,

N.J., 1996.19. C.J. Date, An Introduction to Database Systems Volume II, Addison-Wesley, 1983.20. R.N. Taylor, N. Medvidovic, K.M. Anderson, E. J. Whitehead Jr., J.E. Robbins, K.A. Nies, P. Oreizy, and D. L. Dubrow, “A

Component-and Message-Based Architectural Style for GUI Software.” (Not published in any paper)21. D. E. Perry, “Generic Architecture Descriptions for Product Lines,” Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, N.J. (Not published in any

paper)


References22. R. T. Fielding, “Software Architectural Styles for Network-based Applications,” University of California, Irvine, July 15, 1999.23. B.W. Boehm and T.A. Standish, “Software Technology in the 1990’s: using an evolutionary paradigm,” Computer, vol. 16, pp.

30-7, 1983.24. “Failed technology projects(The Standish Group Report),” in Investor’s Business Daily. Los Angeles, Jan. 1995, pp. A8.25. B. Bongard, B. Gronquist, and D. Ribot, "Impact of Reuse on Organizations," Cap Gemini Innovation, Esprit project REBOOT,

Grenoble, France, Sept. 4, 1992.26. N. Buxton and R. Malcolm, "Software technology transfer," Software Engineering journal, vol. 6, no.1, pp. 17-23, Jan., 1991.27. G. Caldiera, "Domain Factory and Software Reusability," Software Engineering Symposium: New Frontiers for Software

Maintenance, May, 1991.28. T. Durek, "Strategies and Tactics for Software Reuse Tutorial," presented at Improving the Software Process and Competitive

Position via Software Reuse and Reengineering, Alexandria, V A, 1991.29. R. Holibaugh, s. Cohen, K. Kang, and S. Peterson, "Reuse: where to begin and why," Proceedings. TRI-Ada '89, pp. 266-77,

Oct. 23-26,1989.30. R. Joos, "Software Reuse in an Industrial Setting," 4th Annual Workshop on Software Reuse, Nov.18-22, 1991.31. D. Parkhill, "Object-oriented technology transfer: techniques and guidelines for a smooth transition," Object Magazine, pp.

57-59, May/June, 1992.32. R. Prieto-Diaz, "Making software reuse work: an implementation model," SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, vol. 16, no.3,

pp. 61-8, July, 1991. 33. "Reuse adoption guidebook," Software Productivity Consortium, Hemdon, VA, SPC-92051-CMC, Version 01.00.03, Nov., 1992. 34. "Software Reuse Guidelines," U.S. Army Information Systems Engineering Command (USAISE), ASQB-GI-90-015, Apr ., 1990. 35. B. Whittle, W. Lam, and T. Kelly, “ A pragmatic approach to reuse introduction in an industrial setting," Systematic Reuse:

Issues in Initiating and Improving a Reuse Program. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Systematic Reuse, pp. 104-15, 1996.

36. T. J. Biggerstaff, " An Assessment and Analysis of Software Reuse " in Advances in Computers, vol. 34, M. C. Yovits, Ed., New York, N. Y .: Academic Press, 1992

37. T. Davis, "Adopting a policy of reuse," IEEE Spectrum, vol. 31, pp. 44-8, June 1994.38. W. B. Frakes and C. J. Fox, "Sixteen questions about software reuse," Communications of the ACM, vol. 38, pp. 75-87, 112,

June 1995.39. A. J. Incorvaia, A. M. Davis, and R. E. Fairley, "Case studies in software reuse," presented at Fourteenth Annual International

Computer Software and Applications Conference (Cat. No.90CH2923-1 ), 1990.40. R. M. Sonnemann, "Exploratory study of software reuse success," Ph.D. dissertation, Dep. Engineering, George Mason

University, Fairfax, VA, 1996.41. E.M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Simon & Schuster, 1995.


References41. B.W. Boehm, Competing on Schedule, Cost, and Quality : The Role of Software Models, USC Center for Software Engineering,

August, 2001.42. C.J. Date, An Introduction to Database Systems Volume II, Addison-Wesley, 1983.43. A. S. Tanenbaum, Distributed Operating Systems, Prentice Hall, 1995.44. T. B. Bollinger and S. L. Pfleeger, "The Economics of Software Reuse," Contel Technology Center, Chantilly, VA, Tech. Report

CTC-TR-89-014, Dec. 13, 198945. J. E. Gaffney and T. A. Durek, "Software Reuse-Key to Enhanced Productivity: Some Quantitative Models,” Software

Productivity Consortium, Herndon, V A, Tech. Report SPC- TR-88-015, Apr., 1988.46. E. Guerrieri, L. A. Lashway, and T. B. Ruegsegger, "An Acquisition Strategy for Populating a Software Reuse Library," National

Conference on Software Reusability, July 19-20, 1989.47. W. C. Lim, “A Cost-Justification Model for Software Reuse," 5th Annual Work- this shop for Institutionalizing Software Reuse,

Oct. 26-29, 1992.48. R. A. Malan and K. Wentzel, "Economics of Reuse Revisited," Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Palo Alto, CA, Technical Report,

HPL-93-31, Apr., 1993.49. J. S. Poulin and J. M. Caruso, "A reuse metrics and return on investment model," Proceedings Advances in Software Reuse.

Selected Papers from the Second International Workshop on Software Reusability (Cat. No. 93THO495- 2), pp. 152-66, Mar. 24-26, 1993.

50. B. Bloom, Deploying and Managing Microsoft .NET Web Farms, Sams Publishing, 2001.51. H. Taylor, “Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA) 101 ‘What’s Hype, What’s Real?’“, Juniper Networks, Inc.,2007.52. Wiehler, Gerard. Mobility, Security and Web Services: Technologies and Service-Oriented Architectures for a new Era of IT

Solutions. Publicis Corporate Publishing, 2004.53. Pulier, Eric and Hugh Taylor. Understanding Enterprise SOA. Manning Publications Co., 2006. 54. G. B. Machado, F. Siqueira, R. Mittmann, C. A. Vieira e Vieira. “Embedded Systems Integration Using Web Services∗,”

Proceedings of the International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies (ICNICONSMCL’06),0-7695-2552-0/06,IEEE Computer Society, 2006.

55. S. Karnouskos, O. Baecker, L. M. S. de Souza, and P. Spie. “Integration of SOA-ready Networked Embedded Devices in Enterprise Systems via a Cross-Layered Web Service Infrastructure,” 12th IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, September 25-28, 2007, Patras, Greece.

56. S. Furr. “Implementing Web Services in Embedded Systems,” Embedded Systems Conference Boston Class #206, QNX Software Systems, 2004.

57. K.C. Thramboulidis, G. Doukas, G. Koumoustos. “An SOA-Based Embedded Systems Development Environment for Industrial Automation,” EURASIP Journal on Embedded Systems, Volume 2008, Article ID 312671.

58. J. Canosa, “Embedded System Design,” Embedded.com, 02/01/02.59. R. Heffner, “Embedded SOA Management Solutions,” Forrester Research, Inc., October 22, 2007.


References60. Cooney, Michael. “Gartner: The Top 10 IT-altering predictions for 2014.” InfoWorld, October 9, 2013. Source URL is

http://www.infoworld.com/t/it-management/gartner-the-top-10-it-altering-predictions-2014-228419?page=0,2


http://www.infoworld.com/t/it-management/gartner-the-top-10-it-altering-predictions-2014-228419?page=0,2

service oriented architecture - macos...

Documents