Richard Terry wrote:
wouldn't single out Medtech for criticism. (Who I think are being really
unfairly picked on), as there are problems across the board. I took part in
an intensive evalution of many of the major software programs 12/12 ago.
Australia desperately needs an open source solution. The problem with GP's not
getting the software they need from the MSI is a grumbling continuing problem
which will never go away.
The state of all the major players (except Profile which I think is
conceptually light years ahead of anything on the market - but has enough
deficiencies to make using it difficult in Australia) is woefull.
We are now stuck with MDW for at least the next decade. Most of the available
software is 'kindergarten software', with a long history of 'bolt on
solutions', because they programs lack conceptual vision. I take my hat off
to paperless practices using MDW, but then I guess you get used to anything -
sort of like a bad marriage which you can't leave. BP despite some advantages
I think has major conceptual design flaws and is little more than nextgen MDW
with new clothes.
Hi Richard,
Now that you have left us with no useful options, can you expand upon
the criteria that you judged all the other software by.
I would like to know what the currently available software is missing
that makes you label it as 'kindergarten software' and what the right
"conceptual design" is. Maybe all is not lost with the current choices.
When all is said and done, they are all we have (unless you are
suggesting we return to paper).
Gary
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
