Good point. Where IBM and all other efforts fail is these little
feifdoms controlled by shrew proprietary companies and skittish locals
who are afraid of 'voiding the support contract' with said companies
to get data out of local systems. The inevitable answer becomes: $15K
and minimum 90 days for data feed for one site.

The whole proprietary system sucks because it crushes most
interoperability efforts by creating local mini-monopolies in which
local technical support, local legal, local leadership, proprietary
company technical support, proprietary company legal, proprietary
company sales, proprietary company leadership can either delay or
cripple any and all interoperability efforts by just saying no. In
effect, it takes a local Act of Congress to get these things done for
just one medical setting regardless of the technical feasibility or
not. I don't see how IBM or anyone else can deal with this.

I wonder how this is all going to end and I fear it will end badly as
in Nationalized medicine in the US when costs continue to climb out of
control because of this kind of insanity.

-- Ignacio H. Valdes, MD, MS
-- Editor: Linux Medical News
-- http://www.linuxmednews.com

--- In openhealth@yahoogroups.com, David Forslund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> IBM is part of one of the ONCHIT "winners". Also IBM is
participating in
> the HSSP effort. Sounds like normal operations for IBM.
> I've not found a technical reference to the IHII yet, although the
> ONCHIT required at least some of the response to be open source.
>
> Dave Forslund
> Nandalal Gunaratne wrote:
> > This is another interesting paragraph
> >
> > "A statement from IBM said the company will engage with industry
> > leaders. But it did not mention whether it will coordinate efforts
> > with the so-called Interoperability Consortium—a group of large IT
> > vendors including IBM, Cisco Systems Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Oracle
> > Corp.—who banded together to call for open standards to be used in
any
> > national health information network."
> >






YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to