Oh do tell, which "Steve Austin" got up for the job on the Argus board?. Ive been a bit preoccupied and am not up on the gossip thesedays.
CW probably? ??AL? (is he on the board now) Its not surprising the AAPP has backed off with NEHTA's rise to stardom, seeing as they hold the potential to implement a significant compliancy stick rather than a carrot to the whole (pathology) industry... this sort of uncertainty obviously influences the rollout of any significant download client for the pathology sector... 18 months ago, nehta had no position and the best choice for a big firm was a non per transaction open interface (rather than a proprietary closed network with a reticence to gateway- which certainly did seem to be the way the currents were taking us.. its a great thing that has not come to pass and we have the endorsement of Argus by "one of the big players" to thank for that imho) .. look at where we are not with everyone starting to knuckle down and consider interoperability...its great! Sonic is looking at millions in costings over a few years nationally to implement any messaging solution. Its a really important decision... I guess the aapp is in fact sonic mayne and healthscope rather than just sonic. I could speculate that one wouldnt like the other having a leg up on the "preferred" next gen technology (to be in the forefront of nehta compliance) and thus might also influence a no vote but that would be pure guesswork. Im not in the aapp presently. My take is that Nehta's arrival has predicated against the email method over a web services method and thats the real issue..the corollary being until argusconnect has a demonstrated web services suite they will be pushed back a couple of places in the race again.... That said, I think Nehta's biggest influence has been to crystallise the focus onto interoperabilty and webservices and the former is good for everyone (the latter a number of people debate on technical merits and here I disagree with Horst for example - but at the end of the day, for me direct point to point delivery with real time acks that I can watch happen on my server is worth the extra distance over an email method- you dont have to hang up the phone call wanting a result "now" with realtime point to point and you do with email delivery)... Commercial messaging providers may squirm at not having a captive client base in a private network but thats what we need, no vendor lock-in.. a world with one practice results and requests client and multiple incoming interoperating message sources to that client.. jd's .02c JD mbbs frcpa and now a small independant voice in the forest whose public and private position is always going to be to support open interfaces and interoperability for the benefit of the taxpayer, the sender and the client...(there...conflicts of interest clear!) I'll pay to send. i wont pay to have delivery as well! Gavan Lim-Joon wrote: > Dear Oliver & list, > > It may be time to update the axiom that ArgusConnect is non-partisan. > > > Ross Davey wrote on 31/8/2005: > "AAPP, who were on the brink of wholesale private pathology industry support > of Argus, (because it demonstrated the best opportunity to immediately start > communicating with GPs in a non-partisan manner), have backed-off and are > reviewing their support for Argus." > > Tom Bowden wrote on 25/4/2006: > "Lets not dwell on the fact that Argus has been (until recently when > understandably they've gotten cold feet) bankrolled by a large corporate > that sits on your board." > > Since the Sonic CFO joined the ArgusConnect board (public knowledge via a > paid ASIC search), ArgusConnect (and let's face it, Argus) is going to be > strongly commercially influenced..or is that influenced commercially? :) > I put forward that this is one of the reasons why the AAPP chose not to > endorse it. > > -- ================================================= dr john dooley mbbs frcpa aka "ron" _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
