In article <[log in to unmask]>, Andrew Herd
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>For what it is worth, I reckon Reuters are off their heads complicating
>their business! They are in trouble enough without buying more ailing
>GP computer suppliers. The GP computing market is too small for anything
>other than a niche company to make money in. Years ago, IBM and DEC both
>came to the conclusion that it was better to stay out of UK primary care
>if they wanted to keep their sanity and their profit margins intact -
>they did the right thing when they got out.
These are wise words - IBM have allegedly had several sniffs but always
rapidly vacated the pitch. Reuters seems to be bucking the trend;
conglomerates are tending to break up into smaller bits that can more
easily and quickly meet the changing conditions in each local domain.
What do they hope to get out of this?
GP computing has always been a specialist niche market and looks set to
stay that way in the forseeable future.
>
>My impression is that VAMP users are tending to upgrade to other systems,
>rather than Vision - it is certainly the case in Durham, where the number
>of VAMP systems has collapsed. In stark contrast, Meditel has held onto
>its corner, and EMIS has grown pretty strongly. I believe that nationally
>EMIS are larger than VAMP now.
In this part of the world VAMP & Meditel have held their ground while
EMIS has gone from nowhere to the most numerous in the last 5 years or
so. It has been the minor system suppliers that have lost out
So does this all mean the future will see just three major suppliers?
--
John Williams
Email: [log in to unmask]
Fax: 01483 440928
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|