>We aren't talking about the web as we know and love it. We are
>talking about very fast information available to doctors very fast
>when and where they want it.
There's the opportunity for choice here (and a number of interesting
funding and commercial models potentially available). One funding
model would say if you want the high speeds you pay for the bandwidth
- if you ain't willing to pay, you can't complain to anyone else if it
goes slow.
You're right though - it would be nice, I'm sure, to have instant
screen refresh.
>If you have a bunch of medical people
>all accessing an internet connection whenever they want information
We're not necessarily (but could be) talking about internet
connections here - again a choice. The bearer for this traffic need
not be a standard ISP, and equally needn't be a completely closed
circuit or network.
It would be possible to protect against the uncertain response times
of the Internet. I note Mike Wells comments on SuperJanet which
should give food for thought on this issue.
>Text access may be bog standard - but who wants to stay in the bog?
>It says IM&T Consulting in your sig - come on, lead us out of the
>bog!
>--
My point is again one of allowing choice. This is not an all or
nothing technology. If someone is happy with text only and can't cost
justify the costs involved in delivering images etc at high speed,
then that's OK. Their choice....
---
Rob Tweed
IM&T Consulting Ltd; Health Web Services Ltd;
M/Gateway Developments Ltd
http://www.hwsl.co.uk/mgw
Tel: (+44) 181 540 1325
Fax: (+44) 181 715 4337
---
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|