It's not a nasty word. But the revolution is over. Now it's implementation time. This is a typical case of an innovation that is mature enough to be implemented by many not only by the original inventors. Venture capitalists don't like "revolutionary", it's true.
O. Pishev Quoting Gerard Freriks <gfrer at luna.nl>: > Dear Karsten, > > For several reasons I was using that special nasty word " > revolutionary". > > -1- > To be able to get 'plug-and-play' interoperability as opposed to the > very big problem of implementing many messages across vendors in a > uniform way, is REVOLUTIONARY. > > -2- > To have a standard with these capabilities that signals a paradigm > shift. > Paradigm shifts by definition are a "disruptive technology". > Meaning all old, present, working systems have to be changed > completely, rewritten even, to have the full benefit of this new > paradigm. > This is my second reason to use the word REVOLUTIONARY. > > > Perhaps people become reluctant to read about it, deploy it, etc. > But what can I do? > Tell a lie? > Play nice? > > With all reservations I will play honest. > > Gerard > > > -- <private> -- > Gerard Freriks, MD > Huigsloterdijk 378 > 2158 LR Buitenkaag > The Netherlands > > T: > M: > E: gfrer at luna.nl > > > Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little > temporary > Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov > 1755 > > > > > > On 6-mrt-2007, at 13:01, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > > > Anything dubbed "revolutionary" raises cautionary red flags. > > > > As Adrian Midgley once aptly put it: > > > > Ars longa, IT brevis. > > > > Karsten > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ openEHR-technical mailing list openEHR-technical at openehr.org http://www.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical
