so maybe i’m not so misguided afterall. a few days ago, i professed my confusion as to why the joel was declaring the groove gang to be “mere” architectural astronauts. to me – it seems apparent that groove is playing a game with a rule that says you can’t compete with the people you are trying to sell to – namely, VARs and professional services orgs that are actually trying “…to enable things that people really need.”
“Elegant software design is all about putting together simple things in simple ways which have unpredictable – and endlessly complex – uses. The main tool in a software architect’s kitbag is abstraction. Occam’s razor. The best software designers sometimes take this to extremes (see , and Ray’s comment “Groove, in essence, distributes *method calls* as opposed to data” in ). These are the astronauts. Their “absurd, all-encompassing, high-level pictures” are really more like new building blocks, new elements. Alone these elements are pretty useless. But they’re powerful.
Now, I’m not an astronaut; I don’t even like heights. But I love synthesis: pick up two or three things and smush them together to make something new. My sort of software design – applications and systems architectures – almost never involves creating anything completely new, or anything down-to-the-metal. But when you get to put together other people’s building blocks, it’s very easy to make smart things happen. Applications which change the way a company does business. These are Agora’s stock-in-trade.”