In this chapter we sought to
Reduced IT complexity
Lower IT costs
Increased business flexibility and agility, and
Finally, we examined implementation considerations for a Web serviceenabled SOA, looking at the two primary camps for their implementation: Java 2 Enterprise Edition (J2EE) and Microsoft .Net, reviewing their relative market
In today’s economy no business leader can dispute that organizational flexibility and agility are not just a desirable option, but are critical requirements for business survival. It is our hope that we have demonstrated the importance of enterprise architectures, SOAs, and Web services in creating a flexible and agile IT foundation for the future, upon which business value and competitive advantage can be built.
www.arstechnica.com, Ars Technica, October 2002, “DNA Computing: A Primer” by Will Ryu.
www.meta.com, Quote from Web site, By George Paras, META Group Vice President and Director of Enterprise Planning and Architecture Strategy.
www.dmreview.com, DM Review, December 1999, “Enterprise Architecture: The Past and the Future” by John A. Zachman.
Forrester Research, December 2001, “Reducing Integration’s Cost” by Laura Koetzle.
Forrester Research, June 2002, “Which Web Services Vendor?” p. 3, by David Truog.
msdn.microsoft.com/netframework/productinfo/overview, Microsoft, “What Is Microsoft .NET?”, accessed October 20, 2002.
java.sun.com/j2ee/overview.html, Sun Microsystems, “Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition (J2EE) Overview,” accessed October 20, 2002.
“The biggest gap in the world is the gap between the
justiceof a cause and the motives of the people pushing it.”
John P. Grier
This chapter provides a high-level snapshot of vendors actively developing a presence in the burgeoning Web services market. Here we map categories of software and hardware vendors to a typical IT architecture and describe, at a high level, how vendors are positioning
Figure 8.1: Web services solution provider categories.
Figure 8.1 illustrates the breadth of architecture coverage that each category of solution provider
The systems architecture stack shows the most common elements of an organization’s architecture and is not
Category Mapping —What business and IT capabilities does each category enable? How are these capabilities impacted by the emergence of Web services?
Vendor Landscape —Which vendors hold a dominant position within each category? How do these vendors intend to leverage the emergence of Web services? Which emerging vendors should be watched?
Category and Vendor Viability
—Are there viability issues that need to be
The following sections explore these issues for each of the vendor categories below:
EAI and Middleware
Network Management and Application Hosting
Based on the speed at which the Web services market is evolving, it is inevitable that by the time this book is released a number of vendors will have merged, been
However, the majority of vendors discussed will still be in business and will be actively seeking to gain market share and mind share as Web services continue to gain momentum. Regardless of which vendors gain and which decline, the systems architecture and associated vendor mapping, provides a framework for evaluating current and future vendors in the Web services market.
The platform vendors, exemplified by the likes of IBM, Sun Microsystems, and Hewlett-Packard, typically provide a full range of hardware, operating systems, and infrastructure solutions to the enterprise computing market. Beyond the likes of IBM and Hewlett-Packard, Oracle and Microsoft could also be considered platform vendors—although from a predominantly software perspective—based on the broad reach of their
The platform vendors have a strong market position and significant influence over the IT landscape. As the Web services market evolves, these vendors will undoubtedly be at the forefront. However, these organizations are somewhat mixed in how they are positioned to capitalize on the emergence of the Web services market. For example, consider the following:
IBM and Microsoft
—have been the
Sun Microsystems —has been a laggard in its Web services support, both in product terms as well as its definition and support of Web services standards.
Hewlett-Packard —has also been slow to adopt Web services standards, possibly due to the time and effort consumed by its acquisition of Compaq Computer.
IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle are well positioned in the Web services landscape. They all command the high ground in the computing infrastructure and application portfolio of major organizations, as well as having significant professional services offerings to help their
Trust —The platform vendors have delivered complex IT computing infrastructure reliably over the years, and they have the market clout to continue doing so even without a compelling or leading edge Web services story. They are trusted by IT executives, and because of this the laggards in this category may have time to retool their products, services, and capabilities around Web services. They cannot afford to wait long however. Closing the gap on IBM, Microsoft, and Oracle will be no easy task.
—The platform vendors have significant market share in hardware and software, as well as control over significant IT
Product Breadth —The platform vendors have varying degrees of application strength, from IBM with its hardware, software, and services might to Sun Microsystems, relying on hardware, operating systems, and infrastructure solutions. Because these organizations control so much of the IT infrastructure and application portfolio, the platform vendors will likely command a leadership position in much of the emerging Web services market.
Conclusions The industry presence of these IT titans should not be underestimated. While it is clear that IBM and Microsoft should be lauded for their early leadership in Web services, as well as Oracle (to be covered further under enterprise software), the slower and less focused efforts of Hewlett-Packard and Sun can not be discounted, as they have not yet lost the opportunity to influence the Web services market. Web services adoption is still in its early phases, and there is still time for Hewlett-Packard and Sun to refocus their efforts as the Web services market moves from the integration phase to the collaboration phase and beyond.
Enterprise application vendors hold an interesting position with respect to Web services adoption. This category includes software vendors that fall in the following subgroups:
ERP Vendors —such as SAP, Oracle, J.D. Edwards, and PeopleSoft.
CRM Vendors —such as Siebel Software, SAP, Oracle, and Epicore, SalesLogix
Relational Database Vendors —such as Oracle, IBM, Sybase, Microsoft, and Progress Software
Other Best-of-Breed Vendors
—serving vertical industries or departmental functions, such as supply chain planning and execution (i2 and Manugistics), claims software, and
The application vendors have multiple options for addressing Web services. Much as with the onslaught of client-server architectures in the early 1990s, many of these vendors may choose to rewrite their applications based on modular, service-oriented architectures, leveraging XML, SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI standards. This could be considered a big bang approach and would most likely only be used for specific modules or products that are
In the case of ERP vendors, their products are broad-based, multimodule applications that provide functionality spanning all operations and departments of an organization. The ERP players have multiple options, many of which are in progress already, including the following:
Rebuild —the entire suite as a Web services architecture and recoup the cost by collecting subscription fees on smaller, componentized application modules (the existing modules provided without requiring the rest of the ERP suite).
Componentize —portions of modules, or entire modules for high volume applications where more revenue can be collected from subscription fees.
Offer Integration Servers —with EAI-like functionality to take control of integration challenges from within their own application suite, which helps them maintain account and architectural control of their customer’s IT portfolio.
The question is, “What are the business reasons for building Web services interfaces into ERP systems?” The answers are readily apparent, according to Kapil Apshankar in
Enterprise Resources Planning and Web Services
, “Ease of Integration and Reduction in Costs through the Hosted Application Model.”
The enterprise application vendors control a large portion of the IT budget,
A battle is looming between the enterprise software vendors and the enterprise application integration (EAI) vendors based on two broad forces. Firstly, the enterprise application vendors,
SAP, PeopleSoft, Oracle, and Siebel are among the leading enterprise application vendors
—with its dominant market presence has made significant progress in opening up its architecture for Web services. It has adopted J2EE for development and scripting along with its proprietary ABAP language, and has also released a version of its own integration server in an attempt to ease the
—is offering its own integration broker called AppConnect with XML and SOAP support, providing
Oracle —has entered the Web services market with Oracle Dynamic Services, J2EE tools, and an application server architecture that rivals the functionality of BEA WebLogic and IBM’s WebSphere. Oracle has been actively participating in standards groups, and appears to be a serious player in the Web services space.
—has announced its own Web services support with the introduction of their Universal Application Network, a hub-based architectural solution relying on XML and SOAP, as well as other
What does all of this activity mean? The enterprise application vendors mean business and are positioning themselves in the Web services value chain in an effort to gain greater control of the enterprise technology footprint. Thus, they are beginning to offer their own integration solutions, leveraging Web services to create a standards-based, open integration platform, rather than having this imposed on them by the EAI
Additionally, the enterprise application vendors are already beginning exploratory forays with Web services to provide standards-based integration between the array of modules that they offer within their application portfolios. These integration solutions are as much a threat to the EAI community as the actual solutions that they will eventually roll out to the market.
The battle is just shaping up, and as Web services move beyond the integration phase into the collaboration phase, the enterprise application vendors are preparing Web services solutions that insulate their application footprint from encroachment by other vendors. These efforts will assure their
At a high level the Enterprise Application Integration (EAI) and middleware category contains vendors whose primary focus is providing the tools used to coordinate disparate enterprise applications, enabling the rationalization and consolidation of information across an array of heterogeneous systems. With the emergence of Web services, these vendors are faced with a dilemma. On the one hand, they are forced to embrace Web services or be perceived as proprietary solutions. On the other hand, Web services by their very nature will diminish the need for EAI solutions. This really is a case of
“Damned if you do,
Perhaps the real opportunity for EAI vendors is to be found in their deep understanding of back-end application integration environments. This deep understanding might be leveraged as a means to reposition themselves as Web services-enabled integration backbone providers, playing an important role in the initial phases of Web services adoption.
The EAI and middleware vendors are diverse
The number of integration server vendors is staggering, and they are all vying for a position in the emerging Web services market. In positioning themselves for Web services, these vendors are starting from a similar point in the IT value chain: helping organizations integrate complex enterprise and legacy applications to support modern application solutions leveraging application servers and Web servers, such as portals and other Web-based applications. Generally, the integration vendors are addressing Web services by providing capabilities for:
XML-Based Enterprise Application Integration —Continuing the enterprise integration focus but using XML as the integration method as opposed to proprietary data access and translation techniques
Encapsulating Legacy Systems —Implementing Web services using existing legacy and enterprise applications to expose business functionality or create services leveraging existing system processes
Providing a Run-Time Environment
—Assembling and operating Web services once they have been
Yet, EAI vendors have little choice but to provide the tools and adapters to facilitate back-end integration using Web services. In the short
Vendor Landscape Because Web services will initially be deployed as an internal integration solution, EAI and integration server vendors will initially experience growth associated with their forays into Web services.
This early growth, however, will likely wane as organizations realize that writing XML and SOAP interfaces is relatively simple, and that exposing legacy applications as Web services does not require expensive EAI licenses, costly development and maintenance costs, and dedicated IT integration staff. In the long term, EAI vendors will have to look for new sources of value in the IT value chain as integration ceases to be a primary factor facing IT executives in delivering information value to the business.
Business process management and workflow will be a looming battle between the application server vendors and the EAI/integration server vendors. This capability is an edge functionality that fits
Vendors to Watch There are many EAI vendors to track as Web services adoption progresses, and as the standards evolve. The following is a list of the major vendors to watch (in alphabetical order):
WebMethods— see below for vendor spotlight
As mentioned, WebMethods is a leading vendor in the EAI category, and as such is examined further below.
Vendor Spotlight: WebMethods WebMethods is a heavyweight in the enterprise application integration market. WebMethods has strong market share, robust functionality in the integration server market, and a who’s who customer list in many industry verticals. With the typical palette of EAI functionality, WebMethods provides a solid integration foundation for companies seeking solutions for back-end system integration, while looking ahead to Web services and maintaining their options to begin using them when they are ready. WebMethods functionality includes:
Web Services Support —for XML, SOAP, and WSDL
Integration Server —with standard adapters to multiple legacy and ERP platforms
Message Broker —for synchronous and asynchronous messaging, providing transaction integrity across the diversity of back-end systems, hardware and OS platforms, and application solutions
Workflow Support —to accommodate business rules and business process management on top of its integration server and messaging backbone
WebMethods provides a solid foundation for application integration as well as a starting point for Web services. Based on its support for the evolving Web services standards as well as its strong enterprise application integration functionality, WebMethods will continue to be a strong player in the Web services market.
Broadly, the EAI vendors all support XML and have indicated their intent to support SOAP and WSDL. Suffice it to say that the leaders of the EAI movement will be
Application servers play a critical role in the systems architecture, separating the Graphical
The application server market is replete with competitors that fall into two broad platform
Java 2 Enterprise Edition ( J2EE) —One camp is the J2EE camp, in which most of the existing application server vendors support J2EE development.
—The other camp is the .Net camp, which
Application servers are
Because of their central position in the application architecture of organizations, application servers are a critical hub of activity for Web services. Given the robust functionality of these products, they are a natural place to focus many of the services required of Web services applications. The application components and business logic of a Web services application will reside on the application servers, much like distributed applications of today. However, given the highly distributed nature of Web services, it is likely that applications will be assembled from Web services components residing in many different physical and logical locations, rather than being deployed in a single instance of an application server. This is a likely scenario based on projections of how Web services will be written and published to registries for distributed access. The
Vendors to Watch The following are application server vendors to watch over the coming months and years as they reposition themselves for Web services. Some have the revenue streams and large customer bases to carry them until there is sufficient adoption of Web services. For the smaller vendors, however, they may find it rough going as the application server business consolidates to the few strongest players, namely IBM WebSphere and BEA WebLogic. Oracle is a new entrant to the application server business and may well be a contender in this category (in alphabetical order):
BEA Systems— see below for vendor spotlight
IBM— see next page for vendor spotlight
SilverStream (acquired by Novell in mid-2002)
As previously mentioned, BEA and IBM are currently the market leadersfor application servers, with WebSphere and WebLogic respectively. These two vendors bear closer scrutiny, and are examined further below.
Vendor Spotlight: BEA Systems
BEA has been a pioneer of the application server market with its BEA WebLogic application server platform. BEA
Full J2EE application server environment
Operating system-neutral application server makes it popular with
WebLogic Workshop (formerly known by the
Business process management capabilities for workflow, integrating processes, systems, and human users
Robust support for complex business transactions, which helps differentiate it from its typical application server competition
BEA is in a highly competitive market, with formidable competition from IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, and a host of other smaller application server vendors. In the coming year, BEA will likely find itself in a twofront battle: on one front against the large platform vendors and enterprise software vendors, and on the other front from the EAI competitors who are rapidly adding capabilities to their integration servers. Still, BEA is in a strong position to
Vendor Spotlight: IBM WebSphere The IBM WebSphere application server suite provides extensive capabilities, to which IBM continues to add functionality. Recent announcements include the addition of an integration module allowing content management and transformation, as well as EDI support allowing companies to manage partner interaction in an application server environment. WebSphere provides a rich set of tools and functionality that supports Web services development, publishing, and deployment on the WebSphere application server. The IBM WebSphere application server suite’s capabilities include:
Cross platform support covering the full range of IBM’s mainframes and servers, including their mainframes, AS/400, RS6000 as well as Windows/Intel servers
Deep development support for Java-based applications, having been a major driver and flag bearer of the J2EE movement
Application development tools for Web site design, portal development, personalization support, content management and delivery
Provides EAI-like capabilities for back-end integration and content transformation and delivery
Allows the use of business rules and workflow management capabilities to support complex applications, user intervention processes, business process management
Provides messaging and transaction management products to facilitate secure and reliable synchronous and asynchronous messaging across a business enterprise
In short, IBM has a formidable collection of capabilities within the WebSphere application server environment, as well as the
The application server market is being challenged on two fronts. These vendors are stuck between the platform vendors and enterprise application vendors on one front, and the EAI vendors on the other. The move by enterprise application vendors such as Oracle and SAP into the application server space will inevitably challenge the dominant
Web services development tool vendors are rapidly emerging. There is a mix of existing development tool vendors in this landscape, such as IBM, Bowstreet, Microsoft, SilverStream Software, and Sun Microsystems, as well as a number of newcomers. Web services development tools fall into two broad categories:
Web Services Development —Web services development vendors offer tools and visual development environments that allow software developers to create new Web services from scratch as well as create Web services from existing applications. Typical vendor tools include Integrated Development Environments (IDE), application development toolkits, and runtime environments.
Web Services Orchestration or Assembly
—These vendors provide the tools for assembling complex Web services from multiple sources into business workflows. Assembling Web services into a
Vendor Landscape Given the cross-software category capabilities and momentum of large vendors, such as IBM, Microsoft, and Sun, the niche tool vendors have very little control of the Web services market. Furthermore, the Web services adoption model begins with the use of XML and SOAP for integration, and the leadership of those processes may well be driven by the EAI vendors, based on their existing knowledge of large enterprises and their deep knowledge of application integration. They are deeply entrenched, and already have the ability to expose back-end systems processes as Web services.
There will inevitably be considerable merger and acquisition (M&A) activity in the development tools arena as the platform vendors, enterprise application vendors, EAI and application server vendors all round out their portfolio of offerings by acquiring startups. Also, Microsoft with .NET and C#, as well as the massive J2EE movement headed up by IBM, BEA Systems, Oracle and Sun among others, will ensure that they are significant players in the Web services development tools environment.
Vendors to Watch The following are development tool vendors to watch over the coming months and years as they reposition themselves for Web services. This category falls into two distinct groups: large cross-category vendors and small niche players. Moreso than other categories, the smaller development vendors will increasingly struggle to compete against the likes of IBM, BEA, and Microsoft, resulting in consolidation of this category through both acquisitions and business failures. The following lists identify a number of the most visible players in both segments (in alphabetical order):
Large Cross-Category Vendors:
Novell (with acquisition of SilverStream)
Smaller Niche Vendors:
Conclusions As the collaboration phase of the Web services adoption model becomes a mainstream focus for organizations, the Web services development tools vendors may be able to exert more influence over the composition of complex, long-running Web services that span corporate firewalls and multiple organizations. But for now, in the big picture of the IT value chain and the Web services value chain, the large software vendors will most likely command the high ground of Web services development.
Remember calling the help desk for password resets? Remember filling out individual paper forms and sending them to various departments in order to gain access to corporate systems? Directory solutions, also referred to as registries, seek to
User and resource provisioning
Personalization and user profiling
Authentication and security
Reuse of identities across applications for customer satisfaction and
The directory vendors represent a mix of platform vendors, development tools vendors, software infrastructure vendors, and others. While directory vendors are more infrastructure and platform-like than other elements of the Web services landscape, they are an important
As directories are increasingly deployed as a key facet of IT architectures, organizations will begin to leverage these assets as publishing clearing
From a Web services perspective, it is clear that UDDI registries are a sweet spot for directory vendors. Although we have discussed directory-centric strategies separate from the other vendor categories, they really are part of the platform vendor space and are increasingly being provided by application server vendors such as IBM, BEA, iPlanet, Oracle, and others. While the UDDI standards are not yet evolved enough to drive significant Web services adoption, this is a future play based on the evolution of the security standards and eventual
Vendors to Watch The following is a list of the major directory vendors to watch (in alphabetical order):
Novell— see below for vendor spotlight
Novell has been one of the early pioneers in development of directorybased solutions with its e-Directory product. Novell and the e-Directory product are discussed further below.
Vendor Spotlight: Novell e-Directory Novell has a long history of providing software infrastructure products, from its once market-leading NetWare Network Operating System (NOS) to more recent software products, most notably e-Directory. According to market research, Novell’s e-Directory product is among the industry’s best Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) directory servers available today. Based on this market-leading directory presence, Novell has begun to aggressively position e-Directory as a UDDI registry. When combined with Novell’s acquisition of SilverStream Software’s Extend product, Novell now has the application server and development tools to be a serious contender for the emerging Web services market.
The SilverStream acquisition added the following software components to Novell’s existing product portfolio:
J2EE application server
Visual IDE for rapid application development (or integrated services environment, ISE, as SilverStream called it), that exports a run-time application that will run on IBM’s WebSphere application server or on BEA’s WebLogic application server
Light EAI module for tapping into back-end legacy environments and exposing them as Web services or as enterprise Java beans
Application toolset for portal development, content management, data transformation, and integration to legacy systems
When these capabilities are added to Novell’s directory strategy, as well as its metadirectory product, DirXML, Novell has to be considered as a serious player in the emerging Web services space. Only time will tell whether Novell has the staying power to leverage its directory product leadership as a competitive advantage in the Web services market. As Novell’s historical NOS leadership continues to be eroded by Microsoft and Sun Microsystems, among others, Novell will have to rely more heavily on
Novell’s ongoing viability will depend much on its ability to reposition itself for the Web services market. Conspicuously absent from many of the early Web services standards efforts, Novell recently submitted a specification for use of LDAP directories with the UDDI standard. Adoption of UDDI standards have been slow, giving Novell time to develop a strong Web services strategy to position itself in the UDDI registry space.
From a strategic perspective, directories should be considered as part of a service-oriented architecture. Adding a directory server is an incremental approach toward
To date, UDDI registry adoption has been slow. The real need for Web services registries will not become apparent until organizations begin to develop a portfolio of Web services. As the number of available Web services
The fundamental requirement here is a secure virtual location to
Vendor Landscape The incumbents here include vendors such as GE Global Exchange Services, and EDI services bureaus that specialize in managing high volumes of transactions for large customers over secure, private networks. These vendors have trusted relationships with an extensive customer base, and have a proven track record of managing corporate data and transactions on behalf of their clients.
More recent entrants include Flamenco Networks, Grand Central Communications, Viacore, and Kenamea. These vendors provide hosted services that connect to their customer systems and provide hub-like exchange services based on Web services standards. These vendors provide Web services provisioning, security, and authentication, as well as more sophisticated functionality, such as data transformation and process workflow. As more complex Web services are assembled from multiple service brokers and service providers, again depending on the level of maturation of Web services standards, these vendors will become more powerful in the overall Web services value chain.
While there are venerable companies in this category, the startups will have some advantage by not carrying forward legacy EDI infrastructure. On the other hand, the incumbents have deep experience in managing high volume transactions successfully for their large, Global 1000 clients. Positioning for the eventual Web services market is going to rely on development of many Web services standards, and some of these vendors may be in the mode of,
“If we build it, they will come.”
If Web services do not mature in the ways these new hosting organizations expect, or if organizations are slow in adopting Web services in the volumes required to support all of these new
Remember the Application Services Providers (ASP)? Hosting is a challenging business if based on a rapidly emerging technology with volatile standards. The Web services adoption model suggests that until the collaboration phase is reached by a large number of early adopters, and the underlying Web services standards are in place, these vendors will have very low-volume businesses for the next few years.
Beyond the seven core categories discussed in the previous sections, an
Vendors in this emerging category include Forum Systems, Kenamea, KnowNow, and StreamServe, among others. It is likely that additional vendors will appear in this category as organizations realize that the aggregation, transformation, and distribution of information to multi-channel receivers can be used to preserve the traditional business transaction channels of trading partners, regardless of their
For example, StreamServe provides solutions built on XML-based transformation, bringing to its customers:
Connectivity —to industry-leading ERP and back-end enterprise systems
Content Aggregation, Transformation, and Distribution —based on a personalization engine (LDAP directory-based) that allows “ recipientdriven personalization,” or the receivers of content to determine the ways they want to receive it
Multi-Channel and Multi-Format Distribution —using EDI, XML/SOAP, Email, SMS to mobile devices, HTTP, fax, and print
Business Rules Engine
—that allows complex processes to be
Web Services Support —for XML, SOAP, WSDL, as well as planned support for Web services workflow management with BPEL4WS
This category represents a hybrid solution that uses an XML processing engine at the core of a hub and spoke-based architecture. Vendors in this category seek to deliver solutions that preserve the existing business transaction channels while providing leading edge Web services support. Although this emerging category will likely provide important capability for the transition from the integration phase to the collaboration phase of the Web services adoption, it is likely the EAI vendors will aggressively
 Web Services Architect, April 17 2002, Enterprise Resources Planning and Web Services , “Ease of Integration and Reduction in Costs through the Hosted Application Model” by Kapil Apshankar, p. 2.