The Software Architect's Profession: An Introduction

Sewell and Sewell take an opportunistic stand at the ongoing debate regarding the building metaphor in IT systems engineering. Many authors before have argued that the differences between building a house, a city or an airport versus building an application, information system or an enterprise architecture are way to big to adopt each others roles. These authors do not try to convince anyone that there is a similarity between the two fields. On the contrary, they simply state that these builders have a long tradition in engineering complex constructions. They take you on a journey to find out how their profession has evolved and leave it to the reader whether software professionals should learn anything from this experience. For the open mind, this is an exiting perspective.

As other reviewers have pointed out, there is very little reference to software in this book. But as the Sewell's point out, most of the actual software technology is in the province of the builders, and/ or the experience base that the architect brings to their engagement. It doesn't belong in this book. If you're a practicing software architect, as we are, I think you'll find this book puts into context a great deal of what occurs on your projects. While others, such as John Zachman also use this analogy, they use it to different ends. Zachman, for instance uses it as a framework to build successively more detailed models of the systems to be built. This is a book is advocacy for Software Architecture as a Profession

After 20 years in the computer industry, I'm finally able to describe what I do in one sentence! This is a book about the nature of architecture, the need for software architects. I found the detours through the history of architecture interesting, illuminating, and relevant. This book will not teach you to be a software architect, yet, how invaluable it is to understand the nature of this new profession, before we all run out and print new business cards. While the role of software architectect is similar in many ways to what we used to call a systems analyst, this new definition calls for vision and elegance in desgin, leading to more utility and quality in finished systems.

Finally, someone has pointed out that the emperor is, indeed, naked...that all of the hoopla about rapid application development, extreme programming, etc., etc. hasn't given the poor neglected customer (whether internal or external) software that a)actually does what the customer needs (not just wants) , b)is completed within schedule, and c)comes in within budget. All the emphasis on getting on with coding has given us software that, in most cases, only a masochist could love. As the Sewells point out, using software should be a pleasant, even enjoyable experience -- like living in a well-designed house. Instead, all too often, those upon whom poorly designed software is inflicted complain it makes them feel stupid. Yessir, that's certainly a noble goal for the software profession - and one it has obviously achieved in spades! Neither the ignorance of what users really need; nor the hubris of thinking that because one can write code, one can also make design decisions results in inspired software. Let's be blunt: most software today is not designed, it's engineered...the situation is quite equivalent to having Bob Villa design the Empire State Building. I'm sure Mr. Villa is a complete professional at what he does, but I also suspect he'd be the first to say that he'd be out of his league as an architect. Just because you're very good at construction doesn't mean you're an architect. No matter what your beliefs, there is a fine quote out of Proverbs (29:18): "Where there is no vision, the people perish..." And that's the problem: all current methods of software development have no place for "vision," artistic or otherwise. The Sewells bring a long overdue voice of sanity to a field upon which so much of modern life depends. The only problem is that if you're in any way at all involved with software development as it's currently practiced, once you read this book, you'll become increasingly dissatisfied with all the nonsense going on around you. Read it anyway! Get dissatisfied! Customers of software "designed" with the current engineering mentality will thank you- whether they shell out their hard-earned money for it or are forced to use it all day in their jobs. Eventually, we can make a difference - and the first step is to read the Sewell's call to sanity.

As a programmer for 32 years and a manager of programmers, I found this book to be a helpful and necessary introduction to one of the most neglected areas of our profession. The limits of the construction metaphor for software development are examined in this book and put into a new perspective, that of an organic approach. The authors skillfully weave the history of the profession of architecture, its practices and motives, into a narrative that informs software design. They consider software systems as 'extensions of our minds', to use their words, and discuss how to achieve these extensions in ways that can be realized with software construction techniques.This book offers a fresh look at the process of development of software designs and challenges us to embrace architecture-driven software construction. In a day when most software products emerge from the lava flow of code cut-and-pasted from previous projects, the insights provided by this book are worthy of deep consideration.I highly recommend this appropriately brief book to all members of a software development team, especially the leaders and managers of such teams.