Nearly every application we build today has dependencies to other systems. How do we design them to work together to meet our goals? How do we decide what to build and what to buy? Do we host it ourselves or in the cloud? With a bewildering array of choices, the biggest challenge we face today is how to architect robust applications with the right technologies to meet our user’s needs and integrate nicely into our existing IT ecosystems.

Join our Central Region Architect Evangelists for a great discussion on architecting distributed applications using all the latest technologies and best practices.

Session 1: Blueprints for Success. In this session, we will survey the modern architecture landscape from the ground up, including infrastructure, application, and client solution choices. We’ll discuss how current industry trends are shaping our architectures and present an innovative architecture mapping technique for analyzing our customer’s needs and aligning them to today’s technologies and solution patterns.
Session 2: Making It Real. In this session, we’ll take a look at several case studies to learn how to apply the mapping technique from Session 1 to architect real world solutions that add true business value. We’ll examine applications we use every day and take a walk through a Microsoft reference architecture that explores many of the decisions we face when building modern distributed applications.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND?

Architects and Senior Developers who are interested in becoming an architect.

WHEN IS THE EVENT?

Tuesday, Sept 16th in the Microsoft Bloomington, MN Office.  To register for this event, please visit www.arcready.com.

I enjoy reading Slashdot regularly even though it is mostly populated by Microsoft haters and the editors like to come with ever more creative titles that turn even a moderately positive story into one that at first blush makes Microsoft look like Lucifer's handmaiden.  I enjoy to a much lesser degree reading comments posted in Slashdot because they are almost entirely posted by Microsoft haters that in many ways seem to live in an alternate reality.  There are the occasional Microsoft supporters that fight the good fight, but in general I find the comment section to boil down into mountains of "M$FT sucks, has never made a good product, and never will" comments (with plenty of hip geek-speak abbreviations thrown in for good measure).  Don't get me wrong, plenty of criticism can be sent Microsoft's way and with good reason, but the comments are over the top. 

So why am I posting, I was surprised when I was looking at comments about Microsoft's new online Jerry-Bill video (I found this one to actually be funny in places), this Slashdot comment...

"Nah, like me, we just got older. When were were young Microsoft was pure evil, Linux was the savior. All the MS did was wrong and all that Linux did was good. Then we entered the real world. Finding the Microsoft actually makes rather competitive products. And Linux has consistently dropped the ball in some areas. Over the years when challenges of life take effect GNU and Software freedom means less then it did before. It is about getting the Job done, and you find that software freedom has less to do with free speech then you did when your young. Some say we have sold out. I think of it as having a greater perspective. I am a Linux developer and I still use it daily. I have been using the latest versions. However I am finding that Software freedom comes at a cost of other freedoms. And those guys who choose windows over Linux aren't as stupid as I once believed, and actually had informed reasons to do so."

I especially love "Software freedom comes at a cost of other freedoms".  Of course, anyone familiar with economics would know that what the comment is actually saying is nothing more than the Parable of the Broken Window, described by Bastiat in 1850.  If you are not familiar, the basic idea is that you can look at things that are finite resource and realize that hidden costs can often override the obvious benefits of a given choice/action/policy/whatever (it's an excellent way to look at politicians when they talk about using government programs to create jobs, btw - no free lunch - so when you hear "adding new green jobs" because of government programs, just as one example among many, quietly throw up in your hand because it doesn't work that way).  In this case, the commenter is not really talking about freedom (since one could argue that freedom as a concept is infinite), he is talking about time/resources/etc.  Indeed, all of the perceived benefits of one choice may be outweighed by the hidden costs of such a choice.  I'm not saying that is entirely the case in the world of open source, but there are unseen opportunities that can be lost as a result of that decision.  The same can be said for proprietary software as well, so it is a two way street.  The trick is to manage your expectations and desired outcomes to the choices you make,and being open to both possibilities.