On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Len Bullard <len.bullard@u...> wrote:
> In some cases the problem is running out of money while perfecting a design
> versus fielding a design that runs but is immature with respect to the
> problem domain, and complicated by dynamic evolution of the problem domain
> itself (new players in new locales with slightly but significantly different
> requirements).
>
> Toss in an old bad-fit-standard or two and a marketing organization trolling
> for new opportunities in different domains thus consuming resources needed
> to complete existing work and it is the world as we know it.
>

Yes, unfortunate, but all too common. At that point, as a systems
architect the best you can do is point out the issues and risks to the
organization.  Seems to me that at that point both the knowledge of
the SME and the proper resultant architecture -- to the extent that
they have been captured -- can only be archived for the next go around
when the underfunded solution proves inadequate and the need for a
proper solution is realized once more...

> len
>
> From: Peter Hunsberger [mailto:peter.hunsberger@g...]
>
> I can't really see why there is much other discussion:
> SME's are going to understand the problem domain, system designers
> and architects are going to have to translate this into a design into
> something that meets the logical and physical requirements of the
> application.
>

-- 
Peter Hunsberger