I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine that resulted in some disagreements on root issues architects face. The topic of the Architect Nemesis came up. Where some of assertions were accurate it was still founded on a fundamental belief the we should correlate software architecture to the architecture of structures.
So what is the REAL Nemesis of Architecture?
Is it the engineer? Is it the templates and patterns? The CIO? NO…
I believe that the real nemesis of architecture here is in the name itself. Unfortunately we as an IT industry continue to compare ourselves with traditional architecture. Why is that? Well I think because it looks viable on the surface.
Here is why I think the Structural Architecture is different and why we shouldn’t compare the two (at least without having an understanding of where the analogy breaks down):
These are some initial points on the differences of these two vastly different professions. While they look relatively similar on paper they are different. Time and time again I see the correlation between these two professions and keep seeing the inaccuracies and false comparisons which I think leads to confusion and mistrust of our business leaders.
While I have been guilty of making these references when trying to convey ideas with something relatively similar. You maybe wondering if there are other parallels we can reference as software architects, I am not sure. How about the profession of an artist? Software architecture is more art than science, right? At least for now…
What are your thoughts?
Share this post :