Thank you for clarifying that. When I criticize a systems weakness, it's based on the patterns I've formed over the last 33 years of creating products for the commercial sector. Within the context of the VA, where there were competent people at every site to handle installation, etc., the current system/precesses were adequate. Unfortunately, that does not apply to the world out here where people are use to Install Shield and .rpm files.

Terry L. Wiechmann
978-779-0257

Greg Woodhouse wrote:

I mostly agree. The problem with VistA is not that it is inadequately
documented, but that we are trying to use it in wasy it was never
designed to be used. But be that as it may, I agree that the fact that
"out of the box" VistA isn't especially well suited for use in a non-VA
hospital (or practice) is a major obstacle to adoption.

--- Terry Wiechmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Excellent points!

I would contend the MUMPS standard is complete! Putting more effort
into it is a waste of important, limited resources that can be better used
to advance the state of VistA, especially in the area of productizing, support infrastructure and evolution to state-of-the-art technologies


that make it even more appealing.

Organizations choose products because they solve problems for them! Standards are important but not essential to success!

Since the core Open VistA system was released, what new features, packages, enhancements, etc. have been contributed by the Open Source

community to take it to the next level, that is, a whole new version?

Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on improving the state of this important product (nationally important) rather than wasting time on adding minor details to the underlying language?

I don't buy the argument that VistA won't be accepted because there isn't a standards body behind the underlying technology. It won't be accepted because it is hard to install, it is inadequately
documented, some of the modules still rely upon a roll-and-scroll interface, etc.


These are the important priorities!

Terry L. Wiechmann
978-779-0257


Cameron Schlehuber wrote:



Why should the criteria for a "living language" be that it is


undergoing


constant change? Do standards have to change just to be considered
"living"? The criteria could just as easily be that it is used in a
competitive marketplace. To my knowledge not all of the '95


standards have


been implemented by ANY vendor. And as I understand the history,


one of the


problems that faced M seen by a few vendors in the late '90s was


that it was


being changed too drastically by the MDC, or at least that the juice


wasn't


worth the squeeze.

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of


Nancy


Anthracite
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 2:24 PM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] MDC Revival

Don't you think that the VA is one big fat carrot and stick? They


are

currently using the standard, and they may succeed in dumping M, but


personally, I think they will fail and the question is whether they


do it

before or after blowing millions if not billions in an effort to


port this

system to something else. They should just fix what they have an


get on


with it. If they just quit trying to get rid of it, I think that they


will be

able to bring in new people to advance and maintain VistA, but it


they

persist in this misguided effort, they are just shooting themselves


in their


collective feet.

Being vendors of a dead language can't be good, at least not unless


you deny


what you are I guess, and you become "X" instead of M. That seems to


be an

attractive strategy that might be reversed if the MDC became viable


again.


Hopefully, the vendors and all of the big sticks with carrots will


want to

participate in that effort. If the VA ever sees the light, maybe


they will

participate as well.

If push comes to shove and none of the vendors want to participate,


maybe at


least an ANSI standard can exist and progress to be there for the VA


to use


to move VistA along after the next congressional investigation


explores


where all of that money went when the VA tried to move VistA away from M!


On Monday 28 February 2005 02:55 pm, Bhaskar, KS wrote:




I agree that from a user's perspective, having a standard makes a
technology easier to accept, sell to management, sell to the


general


public, sell to politicians, etc.



From a vendor's perspective, it costs money to comply with a


standard, and


there must be enough people who say, "If you comply with the


standard,






I'll




buy your product" (carrot) or, "If you don't comply with the


standard, I


won't buy your product" (stick). Especially in the case of a


public


company, there is a fiduciary responsibility to the owners (the


general


public) to spend money to maximize return.

In the case of an M standard, who would proffer carrots or take a


stick to


the vendors?

-- Bhaskar








-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real
users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members





=====
A practical man is a man who practices the errors of his forefathers. --Benjamin Disraeli
====
Greg Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]






-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members







-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members

Reply via email to