On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 04:31, Karsten Hilbert wrote: ...snip... > What I want to say is that I don't think a browser is the best > choice for a prescribing client. > I believe that the browser is useful for development because it minimises the time spent on developing the presentation layer and can be platform independent. (Once the engine is built, you can spend all the time you have at your disposal on developing and tweaking the presentation layer to make the user efficient or to impress the top brass.)
- Re: access keys, was Re: phys... Andrew Ho
- Re: access keys, was Re: phys... Karsten Hilbert
- Re: access keys, was Re: phys... Andrew Ho
- Re: access keys, was Re: phys... Tim Churches
- Re: access keys, was Re: physician prescri... Karsten Hilbert
- browser vs. desktop, was Re: access ke... Andrew Ho
- Re: browser vs. desktop, was Re: ... Tim Churches
- Re: browser vs. desktop, was ... Andrew Ho
- Re: browser vs. desktop, was Re: ... Karsten Hilbert
- Re: browser vs. desktop, was ... Andrew Ho
- Re: physician prescribing tool development Daniel L. Johnson
- Re: physician prescribing tool development Adrian Midgley
- Re: physician prescribing tool develop... Nandalal Gunaratne
- Re: physician prescribing tool de... David Guest
- Re: freenx David Guest
- RE: freenx Tim Churches
- Re: freenx David Guest
- Re: freenx Dean Hopstein
- Re: physician prescribing tool de... Adrian Midgley
- drugref conversation, was Re: physician prescribing too... Andrew Ho
- Re: physician prescribing tool development Tracy Bost
