Thanks to @swardley and the community for steering me to a better definition of the Wardley Maps I was attempting to produce.
|
Wardley Maps - Evolution Map |
The graphic above introduces the product view of each phase of Design.
As a starting point, it is the output of the workload or application that has value.
The applications, and indeed the early computers, were
Designed for Purpose. They were also
Custom built. This is illustrated by the simple fact that repurposing an early computer may very well mean that the equipment necessary to run a different program may have to be changed in some pretty fundamental ways.
Evolution of computing lead to computers that were capable of multi-purpose computing. The applications were no longer specifically tied to hardware that they operated on (I know there's an argument brewing here, but it's the generalization I'm illustrating).
This provided the means for individuals and companies to run a multitude of programs on computing equipment. This was a generational improvement in application development and lead to an entire industry of boxed software delivery.
The box software products were developed within the framework of a particular operating system with guidelines about what and how commands were processed. This is a manufacturing guideline and therefore we can identify the boxed software industry as
Design for Manufacture and each "box" contained a
Product on some type of media.
Interestingly, the
Product area is not necessarily the valuable output of the workload or application, but a means integrated to produce the valuable output. This means that, while boxed software may very well be a
Product, the overall application may still be
Custom build, retroactively putting the entirety of said application back into
Design for Purpose.
Another interesting tidbit, the tight control over box software lead to the creation of competitors and the OpenSource industry. This happened because the design of the overall application mandated variation that the box software vendors were either unwilling or unable to easily produce or it came at great licensing expense.
We reach another evolutionary state with what are arguably extremely easy to consume application outputs. Built specifically with the consumer in mind and creating a service category (
Utility Service) built upon commodity components. These are more easily offered in a volume consumption model of cost/volume-time.
Utility specifically targets ease of consumption, foremost the usage mechanisms or operation. It therefore represents a
Design for Operations method of delivery. Constantly being updated and firmly rooted in the idea that the easier it is to use, the more difficult it will be to replace.
An interesting consequence of
Design for Operations is that competitive pressures in
Utility drive new business practices like Business Agility/Agile DevOps.
What's next you might ask? google serverless, then google codeless