I think we should start calling this Pendulum Blindness.
We just go from 'one' to 'too many' as equally unworkable solutions to all of our problems, and each side (and each person currently subscribed to that 'side') knows the other side is wrong. The assumption is that this means their side is right instead of reality, which is nobody is right.
The moderates are right, but their answers are wiggly and they're too busy getting stuff done to argue with the purists. But the optics are bad so here we go again on another swing of the swingset.
'Some Services' is probably right, but it varies with domain, company size, and company structure (Conway's Law). And honestly developer maturity, so while 7 may be right for me and my peers today, in a year it might be 6, or 9. There's no clever soundbite to parrot.
Introducing the Revolutionary "Ten Service Applications" – because Ten is the Magic Number!
Tired of the endless debates about how many services your applications should have? Frustrated with the constant struggle to find the "Goldilocks" number of services? Look no further! The future of software design is here, and it's as easy as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10!
The "Ten Service Applications" model is here to rescue you from your software design woes. We're not messing around with random numbers like 7 or 12 services. No, we've cracked the code, and it's all about that perfect "ten." You don't need any more services, and you definitely don't need any less. Ten is the answer to all your architectural problems!
So, are you ready to embrace the simplicity, predictability, and coolness of the "Ten Service Applications" model? Join the revolution today and experience software development like never before!
Act now, and we'll even throw in a bonus "Top 10 Services" list to inspire your next project. But remember, you only get 10 services, no more, no less—because why mess with perfection?
You might like "Software Architecture: The Hard Parts." Though you already describe some of the points of the book. There isn't a magic bullet and every decision to split something apart or which parts to combine has various trade-offs.
The book isn't perfect. The use of afferent and efferent terminology and some of the arbitrary methods to put numbers on decisions weren't ideal. Most of the concepts are sound. The fact that almost every decision has cost/benefit and real world implications for a living product was refreshing. That a monolith can't be cut over instantly with zero effort to a perfect system is absolutely true.
It's good food for thought for anyone considering slicing up a monolith, but maybe don't follow it to the letter.
We just go from 'one' to 'too many' as equally unworkable solutions to all of our problems, and each side (and each person currently subscribed to that 'side') knows the other side is wrong. The assumption is that this means their side is right instead of reality, which is nobody is right.
The moderates are right, but their answers are wiggly and they're too busy getting stuff done to argue with the purists. But the optics are bad so here we go again on another swing of the swingset.
'Some Services' is probably right, but it varies with domain, company size, and company structure (Conway's Law). And honestly developer maturity, so while 7 may be right for me and my peers today, in a year it might be 6, or 9. There's no clever soundbite to parrot.