Rod Roark wrote:
> This is equivalent to ignoring the practical issues that Fred raised.
I disagree. The practical issues Fred raised are real concerns, but the
software companies we're competing against throw a *lot* of money into
validation and certification - especially HIPAA compliance (in the
U.S.). You may find that CCHIT's costs are insignficant in that light.
Perhaps the problem isn't the cost of any certification, but rather the
lack of a solid business that is able to properly support open source
development.
> As an OpenEMR developer and supporter, there's no way that such a
> model would do anything useful for me.
Well, if you're volunteering I think you have a point. But, you might
agree with me if your sole job were to develop OpenEMR as an open source
product and you were being paid US$70,000 per year.
> Nobody is going to pay thousands of dollars for certification of
> free software -- not to mention that such software by its nature will
> be continually evolving and so quickly rendering any given
> certification obsolete.
And why not? I'm not being flippant. It's a serious question. What's
wrong with doing that? What's wrong with going to the expense to show
that your open source product meets the same quality controls as the big
vendor products?
If open souce leads to a viable business model, the money will be there.
Richard
>
> -- Rod
> www.sunsetsystems.com
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
