Although I am an stalwart supporter of MS and I do think Vista is cool, even I thought this was funny. To show that even I have a sense of humor and to share a few laughs with those who may disagree with me, I thought I would share a little true story.
Last month, we got in our first new Vista machnes in our Medical Billing Office. My boss got the first one with a bright and shiny new 24 inch monitor and the works. Of course, it came with Vista Business Edition and Office 2007. My boss thinks the user interface is great but right away we started having some issues. One was the fact that he had not upgraded his Peachtree in forever (I had been after hime about that for months). Other issues was his just learning his way around. And, of course, don't forget UAC. To date, all the issues are resolved and he is a happy camper, but during the couple of weeks things were "getting broken in," he coined a new name for Windows Vista that I, honestly, thought was funny.
Instead of "Windows Vista" he calls it "Windows Medicare."
JamesNT
I dont hate MS.
I just think they are slowing progress in Computing.
I was not in favor of breaking up the company in two pieces (ie. Internet Explorer and Windows Operating System). I was in favor of breaking up the company in 1000 pieces.
JamesNT: Instead of "Windows Vista" he calls it "Windows Medicare." JamesNT
Thanks for the good laugh. Not a bad comparison at all.
John Lynn
My EMR and HIPAA Blog
Dr. Murdoch,
Be careful what you wish for, you may get it.
How would you like it if Mac has 25% of the market, OS/2 had another 25%, Linux had 25%, and Windows had 25%?
Now, you are going to develop a new EMR software. Do you see the nightmare before you?
While I do love MS even I admit they are not always a perfect solution. But as far as the market (and myself) is concerned, they are the most efficient.
JamesNT: How would you like it if Mac has 25% of the market, OS/2 had another 25%, Linux had 25%, and Windows had 25%? Now, you are going to develop a new EMR software. Do you see the nightmare before you?
Sounds good to me ... gotta keep using x platform tools ...
Graham http://www.synapsedirect.com/ Synapse - the EMR for smart users
Obviously software can be made platform independent. If Windows NEVER took over, all software would now be platform independent. Having OSes work co-operatively would be easily accomplishable.
If Windows NEVER took over, all software would now be platform independent.
If Windows never took over, we would probably all be using Macs now or OS/2. One operating system was destined to become number one because at the time computing took off platform interoperability had not become mainstream yet. And, companies had already decided that managing mulitiple platforms on the desktop was not economical. It is just too expensive to train new employees who may already have experience on something like Lotus 1-2-3 on OS/2 to use Open Office on Linux, for example.
These decisions were made by consumers and the industry as a whole back in the days of Windows 95 which was well before cross platform languages like Java made the mainstream.
Your statement is impossible as deduced from the historical record.
Windows did not "take over." People voted with their wallets the day Windows 95 was released and they all lined up in front of the retail stores at 12am to buy the first copy.
Having OSes work co-operatively would be easily accomplishable.
Please justify that comment - especially the bold part.
As a software developer I can assure you that cross platform interoperability is not easy. There are many trade-offs in performance, maintenance, you give up many of the advantages of programming against API's provided directly by the platform, etc.
If cross platform programmability is so easy, then please explain the failure that is Java.
Do not think you may say "blah blah blah is easily accomplishable" without providing some example or justification. Just because you say something is easy doesn't mean it really is in the real world.
With Respect,
JamesNT: If Windows NEVER took over, all software would now be platform independent. If Windows never took over, we would probably all be using Macs now or OS/2.
If Windows never took over, we would probably all be using Macs now or OS/2.
Certainly we will never know "what might have happened" if MS didn't entirely take over the PC OS market.
Windows 3.1 was released in 1992. It's 16 years later now. You feel that we are better off without MS's dominance. I say that's possible, but unlikely.
I don't know why Java is not as popular as it should be.
You do know I like Windows 2000, don't you ?
Here is an opinion about if Microsoft "never existed"
Oh. Actually scratch off all my concerns about MS's crappy OSes.
The good news is ... I hear ... probably 3+ years from now, Windows 7 is going to "change everything" and "all will be perfect".
Phew. Thank you MS. I know you'll deliver.
JamesNT: Dr. Murdoch, Be careful what you wish for, you may get it. How would you like it if Mac has 25% of the market, OS/2 had another 25%, Linux had 25%, and Windows had 25%? Now, you are going to develop a new EMR software. Do you see the nightmare before you? While I do love MS even I admit they are not always a perfect solution. But as far as the market (and myself) is concerned, they are the most efficient. JamesNT
Old school thinking. Next generation software is OS independent. Making it work across different web browsers is not that big a deal. OS based apps are dinosaurs looking up in awe at the bright light falling from heaven. MS is the T.Rex of the dinosaurs, but it is still a dinosaur.
Disclaimer: I am the founder of e-MDs. Highest rated by doctors. All posts are opinion only
Old school thinking. Next generation software is OS independent. Making it work across different web browsers is not that big a deal.
Agree with this 100%...and add on some virtualization as needed and almost anything is possible.
Barbara Duck Ducknet Services TabletKiosk Sales Information
Blog: http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/
The Widget Blog Site: http://ducknet.net/default.aspx
Skype Address: Ducknetservices Phone: 714-898-1917 Email: barbaraduck@ducknet.net
The palest ink is better than the best memory. - Chinese Proverb
>> OS based apps are dinosaurs looking up in awe at the bright light falling from heaven. >>
That may be for the housewife, but not for the real man power user
Let me know when, "Bandwith," exceeds hard drive "Seek time."
Chris Wilkerson, D.C. Carson Doctors Group TabletPCs in Medicine Editor-in-Chief www.MedicalTabletPC.com Home: www.Digital-Doc.com
I always find it humorous when someone predicts the fall of MS. The linux crowd has been doing that for over a decade now with, shall we say, limited success.
Back in the late 90's, people were predicting that IBM would fall into oblivion because no one would buy mainframes anymore. The client-server model would sweep the mainframe away, they said. Today, we have client-server apps to be sure with cloud computing on the horizon, and companies like IBM and Unisys still sell milliion dollar mainframes. The client-server model did not sweep away the mainframe, rather, like any other technology it found it's place in the market.
The new buzz is cloud computing and Internet based applications. Vendors are already talking up a future of doing everything from the web browser, no more buying shrink wrapped software, etc, etc. Will cloud computing sweep away the client-server model? Of course not. For a large section of the market, internet based apps may not be the way to go. The cost or risk may be to high or there may be some other reason they may require a client-server model. Internet based computing will find it's place in the market just like everything else does and in 10 years time, I'll still be supporting client-server apps while developing new internet based ones and big companies like those in Wall Street along with various research groups will still have their big mainframes.
As for MS being a dinosaur, it is true that the company has made its billions on thick apps such as MS Office. Surely, one would think, MS has the ability to move to the cloud and I'm quite positive those plans are already being made. I site an example - Outlook Web Access. If you've ever used it, then you see an example of a web based MS Office app.
Remember, with nearly $60 billion in liquid cash and other assets at its disposal, MS could do everything wrong for 12 years before it would have to lay off the first developer and even then it couuld re-invent itself as a totally different company. Dinosaur indeed.
http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/79614,microsoft-claims-best-ever-quarter.aspx
Of course Microsoft is going to be around for a long time, but what has changed are things like Microsoft licensing Linux..a few years ago we would have never heard of that, but they are smart enough to know there will be a little bit of everything out there.
Who knows maybe one day we might have a UniMicroLinOs" operating system..(grin).
But back on track though even Microsoft is working at the web based applications, but client/server is still going to be around for some applications for quite a while, so we will have one big mix with everything working together. Medical software badly needs to come under one roof though as it is getting to be so fractured and that is one of the reasons for the push with the NHS and the Unified Common User interface that is work in progress. When you stop and think about the thought of having a similar interface in the office or hospital, it would make life a lot easier for the physicians, but the plan didn't start this way and as it evolved with competition, which is good too as we have the ideas and code of many, there are just too many choices and it gets confusing. I've noticed many more inquiries of late on the forum here in reference to getting some feedback on various EMRs.
When I think back about 3-4 years ago on the forum, it was pretty basic for an EMR and the labs were just getting started with integration, so it's come one long way since that time. Integration was in the baby stage.
The web is the only platform that really is not a platform whereby all operating systems can function, thus the software has to provide somewhat of a common user interface and not be constricted by the operating system. Some of the EMR/EHRs do offer a Linux version now which saves a ton of money on licenses, but, the server could be a virtual operating on a Microsoft Server 2008 with tons of bandwidth and power, and that's just one idea and there's many more like that.
Microsoft has given the code for Silverlight to the Moonlight community so they can develop their version as well, just as an example, so Linux can enjoy the same or similar interface from the web. Microsoft is also busy as well as Google building those data centers to store all the stuff from the "cloud" too, so from that standpoint they can offer storage to anyone they want. 6 of one and half a dozen of the other, it's all changing as things move along.
JamesNT: Remember, with nearly $60 billion in liquid cash and other assets at its disposal, MS could do everything wrong for 12 years before it would have to lay off the first developer and even then it couuld re-invent itself as a totally different company.
Remember, with nearly $60 billion in liquid cash and other assets at its disposal, MS could do everything wrong for 12 years before it would have to lay off the first developer and even then it couuld re-invent itself as a totally different company.
Undeniably. They've failed most ventures over the last 12 years and are still doing well.