On Sunday 17 December 2006 21:48, Tom Bowden wrote: > Without a doubt giving the sector a single "standards based downloader" > would stymie innovation in the space. Point taken. Let me clarify, of course there should be multiple competing products, I meant that each GP would only need to choose one downloader on their system, as systems could communicate using the standard.
> AHML to certify compliance and send any systems that don't comply packing, > that would be the first and most important step in getting interoperability > sorted and would be a damned fine thing to do. How about rallying together > to make that happen? Anyone with me on that? Glad you agree. But want are the implications for your own business model (again, I emphasise, this applies to all vendors) if this actually comes to pass? A messaging provider set up solely to service radiologists and pathologists could undercut you, as they would not need to pay for support for GPs, while you (and anyone who wants GPs on their system) does. Ian
pgpkQGH9BXFWi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
