|
While some computer manufacturers phase out
backward campatibility too fast, retaining backward compatibility for too long
is equally bad. I don't know how many people still use impact printers -
they have been long been superceded by dot-matrix pronters which have now by and
large been suprceded by ink-jet and laser printers.
Is the real reason for retaining
backward-compatibility in this instance one of providing for printers that Noah
had on board the Ark or is it a feeble excuse to avoid having to redesign
things?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 6:29
PM
Subject: [USMA:35401] Re: proper use of
SI symbols in healthcare
Is it possible that the need for remaining backwards compatible with the
old impact printers (the typewriter-like printers that are limited to a set of
characers), so even if your software could do the job, you'd be limited by the
capabilites of your output hardware? This would be more of an issue with
mainframe-centered environments, like a school district that I work at.
We frequently need to retain compatibility with devices that are rarely used
by anyone else. I don't know how modern the healthcare IT environment
tends to be.
Remek
|
