Category Archives: Uncategorized

Isomorphic Weighted Graph Databases and Graph Algorithm Non-Collinearity [WIP]

This article is a work-in-progress.

Introduction

TODO

Isomorphic Weighted Graphs

TODO

Definitions

TODO

isomorphic

TODO

Weighted Graph Database Scenarios

TODO

  • Real-time, Cross-Provider, Foreign Currency Arbitrage
  • “Sabre” Service Composition for Automated Cloud Service Configuration
  • Project “Boston”: Personal, Federated, Hyperscalable Homeland Security Databases
  • Large Enterprise Total Enterprise Architecture Management (TEAM)

TODO

Real-time, Cross-Provider, Foreign Currency Arbitrage

TODO

Currency Arbitrage

TODO

“Sabre” Service Composition for Automated Cloud Service Configuration

TODO

Project “Boston”: Personal, Federated, Hyperscalable Homeland Security Databases

TODO

Large Enterprise Total Enterprise Architecture Management (TEAM)

TODO

Graph Algorithm Non-Collinearity

TODO

Definitions

TODO

collinear

TODO

collinearity

TODO

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Structuring Small Powerful Documents

For the past couple weeks now, I’ve been on the left coast visit with friends and colleagues and having an extraordinary time. Often, the conversation returns to what is the best way to convince someone or some group to do this or that.  Here’s some ideas and templates to consider based on my past experiences:

  • Notes from the Field
  • Product Planning Cycles
  • Project Business Charter
  • Preliminary Vision and Scope Document
  • Jeff Bezzo’s Amazon 6-Pager

Notes from the Field

Parts

  • Introduction
  • Scenario
  • Problem
  • Analysis
  • Options
  • Solution
  • [Preliminary] Results
  • Summary

Sample Templates

Product Planning Circles

Sample Templates

Project Business Charter

Parts

  • Business Project Description
  • Deliverables
  • Project Scope / Boundaries / Assumptions
  • Project Accountability
  • Stakeholders
  • Project Execution Risks Summary and Mitigation Options
  • Project Cost Estimate
  • Links to Supporting Documentation

Sample Templates

Preliminary Vision and Scope Document
Also known as an Engagement Transition Document

Parts

  • OVERVIEW
  • PROBLEM STATEMENT
  • BUSINESS OBJECTIVES
  • EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
  • USER PROFILES
  • SOLUTION VISION
  • PROJECT SCOPE
  • CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
  • IMPORTANT DATES
  • OTHER ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS

Sample Templates

Jeff Bezo’s Amazon 6-Pager

Parts

[The six-page narratives are structured] like a dissertation defense:

  1. The context or question.
  2. Approaches to answer the question – by whom, by which method, and their conclusions
  3. How is your attempt at answering the question different or the same from previous approaches
  4. Now what? – that is, what’s in it for the customer, the company, and how does the answer to the question enable innovation on behalf of the customer?

(via Amazon: How are the 6 page “narratives” structured in Jeff Bezos S-Team meetings? – Quora)

Sample Templates

  • None available (yet)

 

Best regards,
Michael Herman (Toronto)
Parallelspace Corporation
mwherman@parallelspace.net

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Michael Herman: Award-winning Author, Invited Speaker, Illustrator, and Trainer

Please contact me at:

PARTIAL PORTFOLIO

All of the publications below are full-length white papers or technical notes – unless noted otherwise (e.g. presentations, training materials, online product help).

Microsoft Live Communications Server

Client: Microsoft Corporation Live Communications Server Product Group / Microsoft IT Showcase

Microsoft SharePoint Products and Technologies

Client: Microsoft Corporation SharePoint Product Group / Microsoft IT Showcase

Microsoft Exchange Server

Client: Microsoft Corporation Exchange Server Product Group / Microsoft IT Showcase

Metalogix Replicator for SharePoint

Client: Metalogix, market leading provider of solutions to move, manage and protect content within enterprise collaboration platforms in the cloud and on-premises.

Microsoft “Alchemy”

Client: Microsoft Web Services Product Group / Microsoft IT Showcase

Parallelspace Vulture

Client: Parallelspace Corporation

Tzunami K-Wise Deployer

Client: Tzunami

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Crossing the EA Chasm: Re-visioning ArchiMate 3.0 Elements as Adjectives [WIP]

COPYRIGHT © 2016-2017 by Michael Herman, Toronto Canada. All rights reserved.

[NOTE: This is a work-in-progress (WIP) placeholder for an article I plan to write …likely sooner rather than later …but there’s no specific schedule.]

Basic Concepts: Nouns and Adjectives

Referring to Figure 1 below, imagine that there are only a small number of concrete concepts in the ArchiMate language:

  • Model,
  • Concept

…and the remaining concepts are simply derivations of the one of these two Nouns: Model or Concept.

figure-1-top-level-hierarchy-of-archimate-concepts

Figure 1. Top-Level Hierarchy of ArchiMate Concepts (The Open Group)

Model and Concept become new Nouns in the next to-be-updated version of the ModelMate Information Architecture for ArchiMate.

The remaining concepts in Figure 1 and Figure 2 become Adjectives (i.e. abstract or virtual concepts) that modify or specialize the behavior of the target concept. The purpose of an Adjective (and more often a collection of Adjectives) is to support specialization of a Noun.

For example, in Figure 2 below, the box entitled “Capability” is a Concept which inherits the following Adjectives (specializations):

  • Element_ModelMate30_Parallelspace
  • BehaviorElement_ModelMate30_Parallelspace

figure-4-hierarchy-of-behavior-and-structure-elements

Figure 2. Hierarchy of Behavior and Structure Elements (The Open Group)

For a more elaborate example (see Figure 3 below), Business Role, Business Actor, and Business Collaboration are Nouns which inherit the following Adjectives:

  • Element_ModelMate30_Parallelspace
  • BusinessElement_ModelMate30_Parallelspace
  • InternalActiveStructureElement_ModelMate30_Parallelspace

figure-50-business-internal-active-structure-elements

Figure 3. Business Internal Active Structure Elements (The Open Group)

Windows Server Windows Service Example

TODO

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

How do I model “X” using ArchiMate?

As a follow-on to a recent “How to I model X using ArchiMate” question in the LinkedIn ArchiMate group  (Modelling Blockchain technology), there are some standard questions that need to be answered before one can provide a good answer to a “How to I model X using ArchiMate” question:

  • In terms of level of detail, are you looking for a
    • Conceptual architecture view
    • Logical architecture view
    • Physical architecture view
    • Ecosystem view
  • Which architecture layers are you primarily interested in?
    • Corporate Strategy
    • Enterprise Architecture Strategy
    • Business Architecture
    • Application Architecture
    • Technology Architecture
    • Physical Architecture
    • Implementation and Migration Plan
    • …or, in the case of the Blockchain example, are you interested in a model of the entire ecosystem?

For example, at the highest level, are you interested in an ArchiMate representation of an entire ecosystem? …the Blockchain ecosystem, in this example.

firstpartner-blockchain-market-map_evaluation-v1-0-30-11-15-page-001

Figure 1. Blockchain Ecosystem (2016)

…or the following? …a conceptual ArchiMate model of the Blockchain protocol (which is the key technical essence or differentiator that Blockchain represents).

parallelspace-blockchain-procotol-archimate-1-0-1

Figure 2. Blockchain Protocol: Conceptual Architecture

…or something in between like the following process model (if represented in ArchiMate)? For example, the following diagram is a standard diagram used in a large number of Blockchain presentations.

how-blockchain-works-linkedin

Figure 3. “How Blockchain Works” Process Model

Best regards,
Michael Herman (Toronto)
Parallelspace Corporation
mwherman@parallelspace.net

*ArchiMate is a registered trademark of The Open Group.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

ArchiMate 3.0: What is the preferred way to model a Server Farm?

For the ArchiMate 3.0 experts: What is the preferred way to model a Server Farm given some of the new elements in ArchiMate 3.0?

In ArchiMate 2.1, a collection of nested Nodes was the most obvious solution.  What is the preferred approach using ArchiMate 3.0 to model Server Farms given a) Grouping is now a (an almost) first-class concept, and b) the new Technology Collaboration element. What is the best choice?

Here’s 2 examples: Server Farm A using Grouping and Server Farm B using a Technology Collaboration element.  I’ve used slightly different scenarios for each example but my assumption (hope) is that is shouldn’t make any difference.

Server Farm A using Grouping

server-farm-a-grouping

Server Farm B using a Technology Collaboration element

server-farm-b-technology-collaboration

What is the preferred way to model a Server Farm given the new elements in ArchiMate 3.0? a) Grouping, or b) the new Technology Collaboration element.  …or something else?  What are the pros and cons of your choice?

Add your answer to the Comments section.

Best regards,
Michael Herman (Toronto)
Parallelspace Corporation
mwherman@parallelspace.net

p.s. Below is a model for Server Farm C – using the Node aggregation approach we used with ArchiMate 2.1.

server-farm-c-node-aggregation

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Periodic Table of Visualization Methods

periodic_table

Leave a comment

June 15, 2016 · 9:13 pm

MS Azure is a bit of a bucket of bolts …very good bolts …but relative to the other IoT vendors, a bucket of bolts.

Michael Herman: Yes, there’s lots of “stuff” but I don’t see any content that targets Architects in the same effective ways that the [other vendor] content does. MS Azure is a bit of a bucket of bolts …very good bolts …but relative to the other IoT vendors, a bucket of bolts. Where’s the equivalent of a Google map that shows me the least cost or least complexity or hyper-performant architectures for receiving events, processing them through an easily composable and implementable pipeline of post-processing steps, and then persist the results and make them available through Power BI? …without constantly having to dig through the bucket or using Web Jobs as band-aids between every pair of Azure services?

Microsoft: Michael – are these more of what you had in mind:
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/iot-suite-remote-monitoring-sample-walkthrough/
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/articles/iot-suite-predictive-walkthrough/
The Azure IoT Suite preconfigured solutions are actually implementations of the IoT Suite Reference Architecture you refer to above.
Thanks for the feedback, we’re actually discussing having more of an architectural center right now internally – can you provide more information on what you’d like to see?

Michael Herman: What does Nirvana look like? An Expedia-like traveling booking experience for all of Microsoft Azure where I provide my departure point, destination(s), and all the points in between (stopovers) and Microsoft produces a series of “flight options” (detailed architectures with *diagrams* and customizable blueprint/recipe documentation) where each option is differentiated by Azure cost, complexity, and performance …just like booking a flight. I get to choose the option (aka architecture) that suits my requirements and budget. Simple 😉

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Subject: MS Azure Services: Is there an overarching architectural vision?

From: Michael Herman (Parallelspace)
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 7:58 AM
To: Mark Russinovich; Scott Guthrie
Subject: MS Azure Services: Is there an overarching architectural vision?

Hi Mark and Scott,

I’m pretty sure that you and I have never met – although I’ve been building apps on the Windows platform since 1986 (version 0.989 of the SDK) and I worked for MSFT from 1996-2001 – mostly on the SharePoint team.

My question is: Is there an overarching architectural vision for the (complete) MS Azure platform? There doesn’t appear to be and I’ll give you an example in a second.

It appears like we’re back in 1996 when Billg/Microsoft finally “got the Internet” and every product group began a completely different, disconnected, uncoordinated effort to add “Internet” to their own little piece of software (e.g. HTML publishing mostly; support for some Internet protocols; etc.) Every day something new was being “released to the web (RTW)” and the Microsoft platform was a mess.

What I saw with Microsoft and the Internet in 1996 is happening all over again with the Microsoft Azure strategy: a disconnected and uncoordinated and not well documented strategy and implementation. Azure [as a strategic platform] is a mess.

My example: MS Azure services, MS IoT Suite, MS Cortana Suite, Azure Logic Apps.

The whole MS approach to Azure Event Hubs is extraordinary (good): Lightweight, inexpensive, brain-dead easy to use, largely unrestricted in terms of how Event Hubs can be used and the use cases they can support.

If I have some event data in an Event Hub, the very next thing I want to do is perform some post-processing of the event data – ideally staying with a streaming, hyper-scalable architecture. I [also] want to create an easily composable pipeline of activities that each perform some sort of processing of each event as the events progress through the pipeline. I want the pipeline activities to be easy to design and implement (e.g. kind of like PowerShell cmdlets but it doesn’t have to that specific implementation pattern but with a similar simple pattern that is easy to build upon).

But which MS Azure services have native support for consuming event data stored in an Azure Event Hub? …almost none

…except for Azure Stream Analytics. But what about Azure Data Factory? What about Azure Logic Apps? Are there other Azure Services I should be considering? …without having to build and manage [several] custom Azure WebJobs and use all sorts of intermediate Azure storage just to connect the applicable Azure services together?

Of the 3 options I listed, you chose the one, Azure Stream Analytics, that has [the] most baroque programming model (some SQL derivation). None of the latter two have any native support for event data stored in an Event Hub and they are a lot easier to use than Stream Analytics SQL scripts.

Where is the Azure documentation that is targeted at Architects?

The MS IoT Suite team has started a good MS IoT Reference Architecture document: http://download.microsoft.com/download/A/4/D/A4DAD253-BC21-41D3-B9D9-87D2AE6F0719/Microsoft_Azure_IoT_Reference_Architecture.pdf

Where is the consistent set of similar documents for the other collections of MS Azure services? Where is the overarching MS Azure architecture document?

Given a starting point and a goal (and some intermediate subgoals), where is the “Google Map” of all of the possible connections and routings across all of the MS Azure services?

MS Azure-Google Map

Can you help?

Best regards,
Michael Herman (Toronto)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Parallelspace Mentoring and Remediation Services for Microsoft Azure IoT Suite

Parallelspace Mentoring and Remediation Services for Microsoft Azure IoT Suite is a coaching and consulting service targeted at Microsoft customers and partners who are evaluating or implementing solutions based on the Microsoft Internet of Things (IoT) Suite on top of the Microsoft Azure platform.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

For more details, contact:

Michael Herman
Principal Architect
Parallelspace Corporation
mwherman@parallelspace.net
(416) 524-7702

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized