Episode14

First appeared here: http://groups.google.com/group/Hardhats/browse_thread/thread/f1219683c0cf9275?hl=en

[Click the star to watch this topic] [Click the envelope to receive email updates] flag Messages 1 - 25 of 51 - Collapse all -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)  - Report discussion as spam Reporting discussion Messages reported Newer > The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet. Your reply message has not been sent. Your post was successful Cancel Send Discard From: To: Cc: Followup To: Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject Subject: Validation: For Verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear Send Discard Ignacio Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 12:11 pm From: "Ignacio Valdes"  Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:11:47 -0500 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 12:11 pm Subject: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 based.

Linux: http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html [linuxgazette.net] http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x [google.com] http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/ [senecac.on.ca] http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/200512070 0126OSDTHL [linuxtoday.com] http://www2.userful.com/

Windows: http://www.ncomputing.com/ http://www.elecomsystems.com

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Vipen Mahajan View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 1:27 pm From: "Vipen Mahajan"  Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 23:57:10 +0530 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 1:27 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. For a chec out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ server. I guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the CPU loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about 30-50 kbits/sec.

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes  wrote:

> Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > based.

> Linux: > http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html [linuxgazette.net] > http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x [google.com] > http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[ > senecac.on.ca] > http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html[ > tylers.info] > http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/200512070 0126OSDTHL [ > linuxtoday.com] > http://www2.userful.com/

> Windows: > http://www.ncomputing.com/ > http://www.elecomsystems.com

-- Vipen Mahajan

Skype ID - vmahajan VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

Rabindranath Tagore: Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high Where knowledge is free Where the world has not been broken up into fragments By narrow domestic walls Where words come out from the depth of truth Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit Where the mind is led forward by thee Into ever-widening thought and Action Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 2:28 pm From: "I, Valdes"  Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:28:55 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 2:28 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Have you been able to do multi-user like several users working on one computer with multiple keyboards and displays vs. multiple thin clients?

-- IV

On Sep 18, 1:27 pm, "Vipen Mahajan"  wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. For a chec > out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ server. I > guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the CPU > loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about 30-50 > kbits/sec.

> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes  wrote:

> > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > based.

> > Linux: > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[ > > senecac.on.ca] > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html[ > > tylers.info] > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL [ > > linuxtoday.com] > >http://www2.userful.com/

> > Windows: > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> -- > Vipen Mahajan

> Skype ID - vmahajan > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> Rabindranath Tagore: > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > Where knowledge is free > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > By narrow domestic walls > Where words come out from the depth of truth > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > Where the mind is led forward by thee > Into ever-widening thought and Action > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Vipen Mahajan View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 2:38 pm From: "Vipen Mahajan"  Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 01:08:57 +0530 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 2:38 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

No, I did not try that. But u would be limited as the multi users would probably be connected over an USB cable, so max of 15 ft. I think.

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:58 AM, I, Valdes  wrote:

> Have you been able to do multi-user like several users working on one > computer with multiple keyboards and displays vs. multiple thin > clients?

> -- IV

> On Sep 18, 1:27 pm, "Vipen Mahajan"  wrote: > > I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. For a > chec > > out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ server. I > > guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the CPU > > loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about > 30-50 > > kbits/sec.

> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes  > wrote:

> > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > based.

> > > Linux: > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/<http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> > <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/>[ > > > senecac.on.ca] > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html< > http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Unde...>[ > > > tylers.info] > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL [ > > > linuxtoday.com] > > >http://www2.userful.com/

> > > Windows: > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > -- > > Vipen Mahajan

> > Skype ID - vmahajan > > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> > Rabindranath Tagore: > > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > > Where knowledge is free > > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > > By narrow domestic walls > > Where words come out from the depth of truth > > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > > Where the mind is led forward by thee > > Into ever-widening thought and Action > > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

-- Vipen Mahajan

Skype ID - vmahajan VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

Rabindranath Tagore: Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high Where knowledge is free Where the world has not been broken up into fragments By narrow domestic walls Where words come out from the depth of truth Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit Where the mind is led forward by thee Into ever-widening thought and Action Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 2:43 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 2:43 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author That's okay, we are wanting to use a 'cluster' approach as that will work best with our physical plant. For example 2 nurses on two heads at 1 nursing station, a table with 4 clinicians, 4 heads and 1 machine serving the 4. -- IV

On Sep 18, 2:38 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > No, I did not try that. But u would be limited as the multi users would > probably be connected over an USB cable, so max of 15 ft. I think.

> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:58 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > Have you been able to do multi-user like several users working on one > > computer with multiple keyboards and displays vs. multiple thin > > clients?

> > -- IV

> > On Sep 18, 1:27 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. For a > > chec > > > out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ server. I > > > guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the CPU > > > loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about > > 30-50 > > > kbits/sec.

> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> > > wrote:

> > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > > based.

> > > > Linux: > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net]<http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com]<http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/<http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> > > <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/>[ > > > > senecac.on.ca] > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html< > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Unde...>[ > > > > tylers.info] > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL[ > > > > linuxtoday.com] > > > >http://www2.userful.com/

> > > > Windows: > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > > -- > > > Vipen Mahajan

> > > Skype ID - vmahajan > > > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> > > Rabindranath Tagore: > > > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > > > Where knowledge is free > > > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > > > By narrow domestic walls > > > Where words come out from the depth of truth > > > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > > > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > > > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > > > Where the mind is led forward by thee > > > Into ever-widening thought and Action > > > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

> -- > Vipen Mahajan

> Skype ID - vmahajan > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> Rabindranath Tagore: > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > Where knowledge is free > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > By narrow domestic walls > Where words come out from the depth of truth > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > Where the mind is led forward by thee > Into ever-widening thought and Action > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Ben Mehling View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 2:48 pm From: "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:48:07 -0700 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 2:48 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:43 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> That's okay, we are wanting to use a 'cluster' approach as that will > work best with our physical plant. For example 2 nurses on two heads > at 1 nursing station, a table with 4 clinicians, 4 heads and 1 machine > serving the 4. -- IV

Igancio-

This is an interesting idea. Is Windows a requirement -- are there other windows-based applications your staff must run at the nursing station as well?

- Ben

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 2:06 pm From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:06:47 -0400 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 2:06 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions from their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS Windows machine. I think they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > based.

> Linux: > http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html [linuxgazette.net] > http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x [google.com] > http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/ [senecac.on.ca] > http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/200512070 0126OSDTHL > [linuxtoday.com] http://www2.userful.com/

> Windows: > http://www.ncomputing.com/ > http://www.elecomsystems.com

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Vipen Mahajan View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:35 pm From: "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:05:22 +0530 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

I had researched this many months back, but I remember that a vendor, probably useful.com, has some interesting Configurations where the single server can power 5-10 "Thin Clients".

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:13 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> That's okay, we are wanting to use a 'cluster' approach as that will > work best with our physical plant. For example 2 nurses on two heads > at 1 nursing station, a table with 4 clinicians, 4 heads and 1 machine > serving the 4. -- IV

> On Sep 18, 2:38 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No, I did not try that. But u would be limited as the multi users would > > probably be connected over an USB cable, so max of 15 ft. I think.

> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:58 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > Have you been able to do multi-user like several users working on one > > > computer with multiple keyboards and displays vs. multiple thin > > > clients?

> > > -- IV

> > > On Sep 18, 1:27 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. For > a > > > chec > > > > out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ server. > I > > > > guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the > CPU > > > > loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about > > > 30-50 > > > > kbits/sec.

> > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org

> > > wrote:

> > > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably > need > > > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal > solution > > > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are > multiple > > > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but > there > > > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > > > based.

> > > > > Linux: > > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net]<http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> > <http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> > > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com]<http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> > <http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> > > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/<http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> > <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> > > > <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/>[ > > > > > senecac.on.ca] > > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html< > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Unde.. > .>[ > > > > > tylers.info] > > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL[<http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL%5B> > > > > > linuxtoday.com] > > > > >http://www2.userful.com/

> > > > > Windows: > > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > > > -- > > > > Vipen Mahajan

> > > > Skype ID - vmahajan > > > > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> > > > Rabindranath Tagore: > > > > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > > > > Where knowledge is free > > > > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > > > > By narrow domestic walls > > > > Where words come out from the depth of truth > > > > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > > > > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > > > > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > > > > Where the mind is led forward by thee > > > > Into ever-widening thought and Action > > > > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

> > -- > > Vipen Mahajan

> > Skype ID - vmahajan > > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

> > Rabindranath Tagore: > > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high > > Where knowledge is free > > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments > > By narrow domestic walls > > Where words come out from the depth of truth > > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection > > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way > > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit > > Where the mind is led forward by thee > > Into ever-widening thought and Action > > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

-- Vipen Mahajan

Skype ID - vmahajan

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Vipen Mahajan View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:35 pm From: "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:05:51 +0530 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Sorry it was userful.com

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:05 AM, Vipen Mahajan <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > I had researched this many months back, but I remember that a vendor, > probably useful.com, has some interesting Configurations where the single > server can power 5-10 "Thin Clients".

> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:13 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

>> That's okay, we are wanting to use a 'cluster' approach as that will >> work best with our physical plant. For example 2 nurses on two heads >> at 1 nursing station, a table with 4 clinicians, 4 heads and 1 machine >> serving the 4. -- IV

>> On Sep 18, 2:38 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > No, I did not try that. But u would be limited as the multi users would >> > probably be connected over an USB cable, so max of 15 ft. I think.

>> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:58 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

>> > > Have you been able to do multi-user like several users working on one >> > > computer with multiple keyboards and displays vs. multiple thin >> > > clients?

>> > > -- IV

>> > > On Sep 18, 1:27 pm, "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > I have run Tin Clients of a dual-core 1.8 ghz, running WindowsXP. >> For a >> > > chec >> > > > out. It was able to run the Windows applications using the X{ >> server. I >> > > > guess it should be able to run 3-4 Thin Clients, from observing the >> CPU >> > > > loads. The bandwidth needed from te server to a CPRS client is about >> > > 30-50 >> > > > kbits/sec.

>> > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Ignacio Valdes < >> ival...@hal-pc.org> >> > > wrote:

>> > > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows >> > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably >> need >> > > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal >> solution >> > > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this >> > > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB >> > > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are >> multiple >> > > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but >> there >> > > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't >> > > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the >> > > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 >> > > > > based.

>> > > > > Linux: >> > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net]<http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> >> <http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> >> > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com]<http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> >> <http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> >> > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/<http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> >> <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/> >> > > <http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/>[ >> > > > > senecac.on.ca] >> > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ >> > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html<

>> http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/14-Multiseat-X-Unde.. >> .>[ >> > > > > tylers.info] >> > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL[<http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL%5B> >> > > > > linuxtoday.com] >> > > > >http://www2.userful.com/

>> > > > > Windows: >> > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ >> > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

>> > > > -- >> > > > Vipen Mahajan

>> > > > Skype ID - vmahajan >> > > > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

>> > > > Rabindranath Tagore: >> > > > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high >> > > > Where knowledge is free >> > > > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments >> > > > By narrow domestic walls >> > > > Where words come out from the depth of truth >> > > > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection >> > > > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way >> > > > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit >> > > > Where the mind is led forward by thee >> > > > Into ever-widening thought and Action >> > > > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

>> > -- >> > Vipen Mahajan

>> > Skype ID - vmahajan >> > VOIP USA +1-630-303-9881

>> > Rabindranath Tagore: >> > Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high >> > Where knowledge is free >> > Where the world has not been broken up into fragments >> > By narrow domestic walls >> > Where words come out from the depth of truth >> > Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection >> > Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way >> > Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit >> > Where the mind is led forward by thee >> > Into ever-widening thought and Action >> > Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

> -- > Vipen Mahajan

> Skype ID - vmahajan

-- Vipen Mahajan

Skype ID - vmahajan

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:36 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:36:13 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:36 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Sounds good. The reason we want to do multi-user from one machine is cost. Psychiatric hospitals are very squeezed by managed care and can afford practically nothing so we need to go as rock-bottom as we can. 1 CPU per 4-6 clinician seems like the least expensive/easiest to manage and fits our layout well versus 4-6 thin client boxes taking up space in the charting areas. Is that anyone else's experience?

-- IV

On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions from > their Linux machines or Windows machine to run CPRS Windows machine. I think > they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > based.

> > Linux: > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > Windows: > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> -- > Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:40 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:40 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author How are things with CPRS on Linux using Wine? Any real world deployments? -- IV

On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions from > their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS Windows machine. I think > they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > based.

> > Linux: > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > Windows: > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> -- > Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Vipen Mahajan View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:45 pm From: "Vipen Mahajan" <vmahaj...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 02:15:35 +0530 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Let me know if u have difficulty in finding these guys, I will try and dig up thr ifo. Vipen

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:06 AM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> Sounds good. The reason we want to do multi-user from one machine is > cost. Psychiatric hospitals are very squeezed by managed care and can > afford practically nothing so we need to go as rock-bottom as we can. > 1 CPU per 4-6 clinician seems like the least expensive/easiest to > manage and fits our layout well versus 4-6 thin client boxes taking up > space in the charting areas. Is that anyone else's experience?

> -- IV

> On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: > > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions > from > > their Linux machines or Windows machine to run CPRS Windows machine. I > think > > they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > based.

> > > Linux: > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net]<http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html%5Blinuxgazette.net%5D> > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com]<http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x%5Bgoogle.com%5D> > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca]<http://cs.senecac.on.ca/%7Ectyler/ruby/%5Bsenecac.on.ca%5D> > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > Windows: > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > -- > > Nancy Anthracite

-- Vipen Mahajan

Skype ID - vmahajan

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 3:58 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 3:58 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing right now so there is no applications to displace.

-- IV

On Sep 18, 2:48 pm, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:43 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> Ignacio-

> This is an interesting idea. Is Windows a requirement -- are there other > windows-based applications your staff must run at the nursing station as > well?

> - Ben

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Ben Mehling View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 5:53 pm From: "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 15:53:11 -0700 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 5:53 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > right now so there is no applications to displace.

That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your site.

I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling your own is do-able as well.

- Ben

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 6:03 pm From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:03:10 -0400 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 6:03 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author We are awaiting CPRS 27 Delivery to get the Codeweavers seriously working on this because 27 is built on Delphi 2006 instead or Delphi 6 or 7. There are no deployments to my knowledge because all of it does not work on Wine.

On Thursday 18 September 2008, I, Valdes wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > How are things with CPRS on Linux using Wine? Any real world > deployments? -- IV

> On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: > > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions > > from their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS Windows machine. > > I think they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote: > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > based.

> > > Linux: > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > Windows: > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > -- > > Nancy Anthracite

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Jim Self View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 6:52 pm From: Jim Self <jas...@dcn.davis.ca.us> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:52:19 -0700 Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

I, Valdes wrote: > The IT staff is > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > right now so there is no applications to displace.

If spyware and trojans are problems, that is more a function of your choice operating system and browser and your network management policies. Web based applications don't have to be open to the internet any more than other networked applications.

--

--- Jim Self Systems Architect, Lead Developer VMTH Information Technology Services, UC Davis (http://www.vmth.ucdavis.edu/us/jaself) --- M2Web Demonstration with VistA (http://vista.vmth.ucdavis.edu/) ---

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Fernando View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 7:25 pm From: Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:25:42 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 7:25 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Hi, nice to meet you all.

Just a thought, why not just use a Linux based (flash) thin client ? It ´s cheaper ($200-300 per seat) than hub solutions and its size is not that significant (you could use it as monitor support :)). And if the box crashes just one user gets waiting...

As I´ve said it´s just a thought, in real life I could never escape from Citrix, as RDP alone doesn´t do the job on larger user bases.

Fernando

On 18 set, 19:53, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > > right now so there is no applications to displace.

> That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your > site.

> I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one > workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost > and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

> As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and > CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to > queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow > down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as > "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's > enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

> The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling > your own is do-able as well.

> - Ben

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. kdtop3@gmail.com View profile More options Sep 18 2008, 9:27 pm From: "kdt...@gmail.com" <kdt...@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 18 2008 9:27 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Are you going to be using spare workstations? Or are you going to be buying new hardware? If purchasing new equipment, I wonder if you could purchase a batch of used computers. I know that our hospital periodically replaces all their computers, and they have stacks of them stored until they can find somewhere for all the units to go. I would think that old hardware would be fast enough to run CPRS (as long as the OS doesn't have too much eye candy.)

Kevin

On Sep 18, 4:36 pm, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Sounds good. The reason we want to do multi-user from one machine is > cost. Psychiatric hospitals are very squeezed by managed care and can > afford practically nothing so we need to go as rock-bottom as we can. > 1 CPU per 4-6 clinician seems like the least expensive/easiest to > manage and fits our layout well versus 4-6 thin client boxes taking up > space in the charting areas. Is that anyone else's experience?

> -- IV

> On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions from > > their Linux machines or Windows machine to run CPRS Windows machine. I think > > they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > based.

> > > Linux: > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > Windows: > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > -- > > Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 6:19 am From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 04:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 6:19 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Buying a set of used machines at auction or whatever is a possibility but has its pluses and minuses. Right now I'm favoring a multi-headed approach but that could change at any moment ;-) Right now the biggest cost factor is going to be flat-panel displays. They do have to be flat panel and the least expensive I could find is about $130 for a 17 inch. If you are going to buy 20-30 of these it becomes the largest cost.

-- IV

On Sep 18, 9:27 pm, "kdt...@gmail.com" <kdt...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Are you going to be using spare workstations? Or are you going to be > buying new hardware? If purchasing new equipment, I wonder if you > could purchase a batch of used computers. I know that our hospital > periodically replaces all their computers, and they have stacks of > them stored until they can find somewhere for all the units to go. I > would think that old hardware would be fast enough to run CPRS (as > long as the OS doesn't have too much eye candy.)

> Kevin

> On Sep 18, 4:36 pm, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > Sounds good. The reason we want to do multi-user from one machine is > > cost. Psychiatric hospitals are very squeezed by managed care and can > > afford practically nothing so we need to go as rock-bottom as we can. > > 1 CPU per 4-6 clinician seems like the least expensive/easiest to > > manage and fits our layout well versus 4-6 thin client boxes taking up > > space in the charting areas. Is that anyone else's experience?

> > -- IV

> > On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote:

> > > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions from > > > their Linux machines or Windows machine to run CPRS Windows machine. I think > > > they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> > > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote:

> > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > > based.

> > > > Linux: > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > > Windows: > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > > -- > > > Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 6:20 am From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 04:20:05 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 6:20 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Do you have a specific machine in mind that you can send a link too? -- IV

On Sep 18, 7:25 pm, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Hi, nice to meet you all.

> Just a thought, why not just use a Linux based (flash) thin client ? It > ´s cheaper ($200-300 per seat) than hub solutions and its size is not > that significant (you could use it as monitor support :)). And if the > box crashes just one user gets waiting...

> As I´ve said it´s just a thought, in real life I could never escape > from Citrix, as RDP alone doesn´t do the job on larger user bases.

> Fernando

> On 18 set, 19:53, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > > > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > > > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > > > right now so there is no applications to displace.

> > That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your > > site.

> > I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one > > workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost > > and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

> > As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and > > CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to > > queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow > > down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as > > "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's > > enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

> > The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling > > your own is do-able as well.

> > - Ben

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 6:22 am From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 04:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 6:22 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Any estimate of when or is this a it arrives when it arrives type thing? -- IV

On Sep 18, 6:03 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > We are awaiting CPRS 27 Delivery to get the Codeweavers seriously working on > this because 27 is built on Delphi 2006 instead or Delphi 6 or 7. There are > no deployments to my knowledge because all of it does not work on Wine.

> On Thursday 18 September 2008, I, Valdes wrote:

> > How are things with CPRS on Linux using Wine? Any real world > > deployments? -- IV

> > On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions > > > from their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS Windows machine. > > > I think they find it is easier to maintain and faster.

> > > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote: > > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > > > > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > > > > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > > > > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > > > > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > > > > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > > > > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > > > > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > > > > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > > > > based.

> > > > Linux: > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > > Windows: > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > > -- > > > Nancy Anthracite

> -- > Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Joseph Dal Molin View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 8:57 am From: Joseph Dal Molin <dalmo...@e-cology.ca> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:57:53 -0400 Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 8:57 am Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author It's when of those AWA's

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I, Valdes wrote: > Any estimate of when or is this a it arrives when it arrives type > thing? -- IV

> On Sep 18, 6:03 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: >> We are awaiting CPRS 27 Delivery to get the Codeweavers seriously working on >> this because 27 is built on Delphi 2006 instead or Delphi 6 or 7. There are >> no deployments to my knowledge because all of it does not work on Wine.

>> On Thursday 18 September 2008, I, Valdes wrote:

>>> How are things with CPRS on Linux using Wine? Any real world >>> deployments? -- IV >>> On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop sessions >>>> from their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS Windows machine. >>>> I think they find it is easier to maintain and faster. >>>> On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote: >>>>> Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows >>>>> workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need >>>>> about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution >>>>> would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this >>>>> recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB >>>>> keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple >>>>> examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there >>>>> does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't >>>>> appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the >>>>> client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 >>>>> based. >>>>> Linux: >>>>> http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] >>>>> http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] >>>>> http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] >>>>> http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ >>>>> 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] >>>>> http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL >>>>> [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/ >>>>> Windows: >>>>> http://www.ncomputing.com/ >>>>> http://www.elecomsystems.com >>>> -- >>>> Nancy Anthracite >> -- >> Nancy Anthracite

>.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Fernando View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 9:39 am From: Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 07:39:46 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 9:39 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Best of breed (IMO): http://www.wyse.com/products/hardware/thinclients/index.asp Cheaper alternative: http://www.norhtec.com/products/mcjr/index.html

Fernando

On 19 set, 08:20, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Do you have a specific machine in mind that you can send a link too? > -- IV

> On Sep 18, 7:25 pm, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Hi, nice to meet you all.

> > Just a thought, why not just use a Linux based (flash) thin client ? It > > ´s cheaper ($200-300 per seat) than hub solutions and its size is not > > that significant (you could use it as monitor support :)). And if the > > box crashes just one user gets waiting...

> > As I´ve said it´s just a thought, in real life I could never escape > > from Citrix, as RDP alone doesn´t do the job on larger user bases.

> > Fernando

> > On 18 set, 19:53, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

> > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > > Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > > > > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > > > > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > > > > right now so there is no applications to displace.

> > > That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your > > > site.

> > > I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one > > > workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost > > > and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

> > > As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and > > > CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to > > > queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow > > > down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as > > > "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's > > > enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

> > > The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling > > > your own is do-able as well.

> > > - Ben- Ocultar texto entre aspas -

> - Mostrar texto entre aspas -

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 2:43 pm From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:43:23 -0400 Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author It has been released in the VA. I have a FOIA request in to get it for all of us sooner than the ftp site release. My luck with FOIA requests has not been great.

After that it is hard to estimate how long it will take the Codeweavers to get it working. They would have to assess it to give us an estimate. We will also need some detailed descriptions of what is not working, so we have some work to do there before they even look at it.

On Friday 19 September 2008, I, Valdes wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Any estimate of when or is this a it arrives when it arrives type > thing? -- IV

> On Sep 18, 6:03 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: > > We are awaiting CPRS 27 Delivery to get the Codeweavers seriously working > > on this because 27 is built on Delphi 2006 instead or Delphi 6 or 7. > > There are no deployments to my knowledge because all of it does not work > > on Wine.

> > On Thursday 18 September 2008, I, Valdes wrote: > > > How are things with CPRS on Linux using Wine? Any real world > > > deployments? -- IV

> > > On Sep 18, 2:06 pm, Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > > I think some people have a Windows server and use remote desktop > > > > sessions from their Linux machines or Windows macine to run CPRS > > > > Windows machine. I think they find it is easier to maintain and > > > > faster.

> > > > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Ignacio Valdes wrote: > > > > > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > > > > > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably > > > > > need about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal > > > > > solution would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done > > > > > this recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, > > > > > USB keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are > > > > > multiple examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) > > > > > but there does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and > > > > > doesn't appear to have much for what we will probably end up using > > > > > for the client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is > > > > > Fedora 9 based.

> > > > > Linux: > > > > >http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net] > > > > >http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com] > > > > >http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca] > > > > >http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > > > > > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info] > > > > >http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL > > > > > [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> > > > > Windows: > > > > >http://www.ncomputing.com/ > > > > >http://www.elecomsystems.com

> > > > -- > > > > Nancy Anthracite

> > -- > > Nancy Anthracite

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 19 2008, 2:51 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 19 2008 2:51 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author They look cool, but they are still pricey, especially when you can build your own full system (without the form factor advantage of course) for $155 or less: http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2625&tag=nl.e539

-- IV

On Sep 19, 9:39 am, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 20 2008, 7:43 am From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:43:12 -0500 Local: Sat, Sep 20 2008 7:43 am Subject: Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Nancy Anthracite wrote: > After that it is hard to estimate how long it will take the Codeweavers to get > it working. They would have to assess it to give us an estimate. We will > also need some detailed descriptions of what is not working, so we have some > work to do there before they even look at it.

Is there a list somewhere of what does not yet work in CPRS 26?

jlz

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. David Whitten View profile More options Sep 20 2008, 12:09 pm From: "David Whitten" <whit...@worldvista.org> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:09:21 -0500 Local: Sat, Sep 20 2008 12:09 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Probably that list exists, but I trust your judgement John, you have a good eye for discrepancies and a good idea what the system is supposed to do.

Could you create such a list and put it on VistApedia ?

Dave

On 9/20/08, JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -

> Nancy Anthracite wrote:

> > After that it is hard to estimate how long it will take the Codeweavers > to get > > it working. They would have to assess it to give us an estimate. We > will > > also need some detailed descriptions of what is not working, so we have > some > > work to do there before they even look at it.

> Is there a list somewhere of what does not yet work in CPRS 26?

> jlz

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 20 2008, 4:05 pm From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:05:55 -0500 Local: Sat, Sep 20 2008 4:05 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

David Whitten wrote: > Probably that list exists, but I trust your judgement John, > you have a good eye for discrepancies and a good idea what the > system is supposed to do.

> Could you create such a list and put it on VistApedia ?

Ok, David, I added a page to VistApedia for such a list (with no content yet).

http://vistapedia.net/index.php?title=CPRS_Installation#Wine/Crossover

Your trust in my judgement is the only discrepancy I can identify. (I have no experience with CPRS on Wine.) But I just downloaded Crossover to make an attempt.

I would very much appreciate details from whomever about where the problems currently exist. Edit the wiki yourself or leave word here, please.

jlz

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Discussion subject changed to "Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems?" by Fernando Fernando View profile More options Sep 20 2008, 8:17 pm From: Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 18:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Local: Sat, Sep 20 2008 8:17 pm Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Yes, that´s really a great choice, I don´t think I could get those prices here :(

On 19 set, 16:51, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > They look cool, but they are still pricey, especially when you can > build your own full system (without the form factor advantage of > course) for $155 or less:http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2625&tag=nl.e539

> -- IV

> On Sep 19, 9:39 am, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Best of breed (IMO):http://www.wyse.com/products/hardware/thinclients/index.asp > > Cheaper alternative:http://www.norhtec.com/products/mcjr/index.html

> > Fernando

> > On 19 set, 08:20, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > Do you have a specific machine in mind that you can send a link too? > > > -- IV

> > > On Sep 18, 7:25 pm, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Hi, nice to meet you all.

> > > > Just a thought, why not just use a Linux based (flash) thin client ? It > > > > ´s cheaper ($200-300 per seat) than hub solutions and its size is not > > > > that significant (you could use it as monitor support :)). And if the > > > > box crashes just one user gets waiting...

> > > > As I´ve said it´s just a thought, in real life I could never escape > > > > from Citrix, as RDP alone doesn´t do the job on larger user bases.

> > > > Fernando

> > > > On 18 set, 19:53, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

> > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > > > > Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > > > > > > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > > > > > > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > > > > > > right now so there is no applications to displace.

> > > > > That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your > > > > > site.

> > > > > I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one > > > > > workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost > > > > > and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

> > > > > As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and > > > > > CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to > > > > > queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow > > > > > down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as > > > > > "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's > > > > > enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

> > > > > The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling > > > > > your own is do-able as well.

> > > > > - Ben- Ocultar texto entre aspas -

> > > - Mostrar texto entre aspas -- Ocultar texto entre aspas -

> - Mostrar texto entre aspas -

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Jeremy Coleman View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 10:28 am From: Jeremy Coleman <jeremymc...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 08:28:15 -0700 (PDT) Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 10:28 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware, multi-user systems? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author One option that may be slightly more, but has other advantages is clear cube. http://clearcube.com They say that you can put up to 5 to 6 iports on 1 blade, but if all you are doing is CPRS then I wonder if you could do 10 or more with degradation. Other benefits are that physical security is much better, because the pc is a blade that sits in the data center. The only equipment that would sit at desktop is the iport and monitor. Also if you get 1 extra blade as a spare you can have instant failover.

One thing to think about with a multihead pc option, when 1 pc goes down, the whole nursing station goes down. That make a single pc failure at 9:30 PM on Friday an emergency. I totally get cranking down the money on the hardware, but you get what you pay for. Money spent on good hardware is money saved on tech time working on junk.

On Sep 19, 2:51 pm, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > They look cool, but they are still pricey, especially when you can > build your own full system (without the form factor advantage of > course) for $155 or less:http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2625&tag=nl.e539

> -- IV

> On Sep 19, 9:39 am, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Best of breed (IMO):http://www.wyse.com/products/hardware/thinclients/index.asp > > Cheaper alternative:http://www.norhtec.com/products/mcjr/index.html

> > Fernando

> > On 19 set, 08:20, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > Do you have a specific machine in mind that you can send a link too? > > > -- IV

> > > On Sep 18, 7:25 pm, Fernando <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Hi, nice to meet you all.

> > > > Just a thought, why not just use a Linux based (flash) thin client ? It > > > > ´s cheaper ($200-300 per seat) than hub solutions and its size is not > > > > that significant (you could use it as monitor support :)). And if the > > > > box crashes just one user gets waiting...

> > > > As I´ve said it´s just a thought, in real life I could never escape > > > > from Citrix, as RDP alone doesn´t do the job on larger user bases.

> > > > Fernando

> > > > On 18 set, 19:53, "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> wrote:

> > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:58 PM, I, Valdes <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

> > > > > > Nothing real specific that OpenOffice cannot handle. The IT staff is > > > > > > actually pretty happy that all this is NOT browser based because > > > > > > spyware and trojans are a constant problem. Clinicians have nothing > > > > > > right now so there is no applications to displace.

> > > > > That being the case, then a multi-head Linux box is a real option for your > > > > > site.

> > > > > I really like this idea for a busy nursing station. In this model, only one > > > > > workstation, network connection, etc. is required. There is up-front cost > > > > > and long-term power savings. It's a green solution too.

> > > > > As a facility transitions to full electronic clinical documentation and > > > > > CPOE, we definitely need to make certain providers aren't being forced to > > > > > queue up due to a limited number of workstations. Not only does this slow > > > > > down the workflow of the facility, it lowers provider adoption rates as > > > > > "waiting for a workstation" just becomes just another frustration (there's > > > > > enough already!) of the transition to an EMR.

> > > > > The Userful.com solution looks pretty well packaged, but I'm sure rolling > > > > > your own is do-able as well.

> > > > > - Ben- Ocultar texto entre aspas -

> > > - Mostrar texto entre aspas -

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Discussion subject changed to "CPRS & wine" by I, Valdes I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 10:42 am From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 08:42:46 -0700 (PDT) Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 10:42 am Subject: Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author When was the last attempt for CPRS on WINE? -- IV

On Sep 20, 4:05 pm, JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > David Whitten wrote: > > Probably that list exists, but I trust your judgement John, > > you have a good eye for discrepancies and a good idea what the > > system is supposed to do.

> > Could you create such a list and put it on VistApedia ?

> Ok, David, > I added a page to VistApedia for such a list (with no content yet).

> http://vistapedia.net/index.php?title=CPRS_Installation#Wine/Crossover

> Your trust in my judgement is the only discrepancy I can identify. (I have no > experience with CPRS on Wine.) But I just downloaded Crossover to make an attempt.

> I would very much appreciate details from whomever about where the problems > currently exist. Edit the wiki yourself or leave word here, please.

> jlz

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 3:02 pm From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:02:20 -0500 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 3:02 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

I, Valdes wrote: > When was the last attempt for CPRS on WINE? -- IV

last night. :-)

jlz

(I do not have any real information about any of the previous attempts, nor of any documentation of what was found.)

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Joseph Dal Molin View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 5:44 pm From: Joseph Dal Molin <dalmo...@e-cology.ca> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:44:10 -0400 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 5:44 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author ....was that a Chardonnay or a Pinot

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - JohnLeo Zimmer wrote: > I, Valdes wrote: >> When was the last attempt for CPRS on WINE? -- IV

> last night. :-)

> jlz

> (I do not have any real information about any of the previous attempts, nor of > any documentation of what was found.)

>.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 8:19 pm From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:19:45 -0500 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 8:19 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Joseph Dal Molin wrote: > ....was that a Chardonnay or a Pinot

funny you should ask...

"CrossOver Linux Standard includes support for multiple bottles. A bottle is a virtual Windows environment with its own isolated C: drive, fonts, registry, and software."

It has been a good while since I've tried Crossover. But now they do store their "wine" in "bottles"

...cute

jlz

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -

> JohnLeo Zimmer wrote: >> I, Valdes wrote: >>> When was the last attempt for CPRS on WINE? -- IV

>> last night. :-)

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Woodhouse Gregory View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 8:58 pm From: Woodhouse Gregory <gregory.woodho...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 18:58:31 -0700 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 8:58 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Sep 22, 2008, at 6:19 PM, JohnLeo Zimmer wrote:

> It has been a good while since I've tried Crossover. But now they > do store their > "wine" in "bottles"

> ...cute

Do they have corks?

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 9:32 pm From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:32:38 -0400 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 9:32 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author I just tried the latest, 1.1.5. On Monday 22 September 2008, Woodhouse Gregory wrote:

> On Sep 22, 2008, at 6:19 PM, JohnLeo Zimmer wrote: > > It has been a good while since I've tried Crossover. But now they > > do store their > > "wine" in "bottles"

> > ...cute

> Do they have corks?

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 22 2008, 10:46 pm From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:46:31 -0500 Local: Mon, Sep 22 2008 10:46 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Nancy Anthracite wrote: > I just tried the latest, 1.1.5.

Nancy, do we have any checklist of what works and what fails?

johnleoz

(I was speaking of Crossover 7.0.2)

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. I, Valdes View profile More options Sep 25 2008, 1:17 pm From: "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Sep 25 2008 1:17 pm Subject: Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author I'm nearly ready to deploy onto the units here at Intracare. Hardware is holding me back right now and a GNULinux/CPRS combination would be ideal and could be quickly deployed. There seems to be little information as to what are the problems with this lash-up. Does anyone have further information? -- IV

On Sep 22, 10:46 pm, JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Nancy Anthracite wrote: > > I just tried the latest, 1.1.5.

> Nancy, do we have any checklist of what works and what fails?

> johnleoz

> (I was speaking of Crossover 7.0.2)

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Crawford Rainwater View profile More options Sep 26 2008, 8:21 am From: Crawford Rainwater <crawford.rainwa...@linux-etc.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Local: Fri, Sep 26 2008 8:21 am Subject: Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Another request for the current state of WINE + CPRS as well.

--- Crawford

On Sep 25, 12:17 pm, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > I'm nearly ready to deploy onto the units here at Intracare. Hardware > is holding me back right now and a GNULinux/CPRS combination would be > ideal and could be quickly deployed. There seems to be little > information as to what are the problems with this lash-up. Does anyone > have further information? -- IV

> On Sep 22, 10:46 pm, JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Nancy Anthracite wrote: > > > I just tried the latest, 1.1.5.

> > Nancy, do we have any checklist of what works and what fails?

> > johnleoz

> > (I was speaking of Crossover 7.0.2)

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. JohnLeo Zimmer View profile More options Sep 26 2008, 8:48 am From: JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 08:48:35 -0500 Local: Fri, Sep 26 2008 8:48 am Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Ignatio, I think it is known that Wine/Crossover is not ready for deployment in production. However, that is hearsay and lacks any documentation of where the problems still occur. (I am not saying problems don't exist, just that I don't have access to any details.)

If a serious attempt to move forward is to be made, these need go be firmed up. I think we are just going to have to build a list of known (or even alleged) glitches that we can publish and then test. I put up a page on the wiki for that purpose. It is empty so far, but it could provide a starting place for those who want to test CPRS on either wine or Crossover.

Possibly the other GUI tools that are available should be included as they may provide clues to the remaining problems and potential solutions.

jlz

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I, Valdes wrote: > I'm nearly ready to deploy onto the units here at Intracare. Hardware > is holding me back right now and a GNULinux/CPRS combination would be > ideal and could be quickly deployed. There seems to be little > information as to what are the problems with this lash-up. Does anyone > have further information? -- IV

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 26 2008, 9:05 am From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:05:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Sorry. I should have said something. I talked with Ignacio. We are awaiting the CPRS 27 before the Codeweavers get back to work on this. I recommended that Ignacio give up on trying to run it on Wine for now. A lot of it works, but not all of it. We were going to spend the time to find everywhere it did not work, but decided that that time would better be spent on 27 when it was release, not on 26 that is about to be replaced.

On Friday 26 September 2008, Crawford Rainwater wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Another request for the current state of WINE + CPRS as well.

> --- Crawford

> On Sep 25, 12:17 pm, "I, Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote: > > I'm nearly ready to deploy onto the units here at Intracare. Hardware > > is holding me back right now and a GNULinux/CPRS combination would be > > ideal and could be quickly deployed. There seems to be little > > information as to what are the problems with this lash-up. Does anyone > > have further information? -- IV

> > On Sep 22, 10:46 pm, JohnLeo Zimmer <johnleo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Nancy Anthracite wrote: > > > > I just tried the latest, 1.1.5.

> > > Nancy, do we have any checklist of what works and what fails?

> > > johnleoz

> > > (I was speaking of Crossover 7.0.2)

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Sep 26 2008, 9:46 am From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 10:46:38 -0400 Local: Fri, Sep 26 2008 9:46 am Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: CPRS & wine Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author I have been talking with the Codeweavers fairly recently, and I have the Crossover version they have that is supposed to be the best for CPRS, and it, at first glance, is no better than Wine itself at this point.

I REALLY do want to see this happen, but when the Codeweavers are so busy with paid work and the new CPRS coming out, I think we need to wait rather than burn up the good will we have with them working on a version that is going to be gone in a few months.

Now if somebody has really deep pockets and can pay to get this done, that would change the equation considerably. That is probably going to be a considerable chunk of change, though - probably $40,000 plus. But even if Santa Claus showed up, why spend it now on version 26?

On Friday 26 September 2008, JohnLeo Zimmer wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Ignatio, I think it is known that Wine/Crossover is not ready for > deployment in production. However, that is hearsay and lacks any > documentation of where the problems still occur. (I am not saying problems > don't exist, just that I don't have access to any details.)

> If a serious attempt to move forward is to be made, these need go be firmed > up. I think we are just going to have to build a list of known (or even > alleged) glitches that we can publish and then test. I put up a page on the > wiki for that purpose. It is empty so far, but it could provide a starting > place for those who want to test CPRS on either wine or Crossover.

> Possibly the other GUI tools that are available should be included as they > may provide clues to the remaining problems and potential solutions.

> jlz

> I, Valdes wrote: > > I'm nearly ready to deploy onto the units here at Intracare. Hardware > > is holding me back right now and a GNULinux/CPRS combination would be > > ideal and could be quickly deployed. There seems to be little > > information as to what are the problems with this lash-up. Does anyone > > have further information? -- IV

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Discussion subject changed to "Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware mix and policies?" by ivaldes1@gmail.com ivaldes1@gmail.com View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 9:05 am From: "ivald...@gmail.com" <ivald...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 07:05:48 -0700 (PDT) Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 9:05 am Subject: Re: Intracare Implementation Log Episode 14: Hardware mix and policies? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Remove | Report this message | Find messages by this author We are still experimenting with multi-seat systems without conclusion yet. What we are planning is 30 permanent workstations over 3 floors for those that do not have, do not want, or forget or have a broken laptop. However, we will very likely have wireless and laptops as well. Can anyone share their policies on that?

Scenarios:

1) Employees, doctors buy or use their own wireless laptop and bring it in. 2) Institutional laptops per floor that stay in the hospital at all times. 3) A mix of 1 and 2.

Pros with 1) have own personal machine. Don't have to compete to get to the institutional ones if there are not enough. Don't have to deal with things others have done. Cons with 1) security, malware, spyware, breakage, non-standard Configurations, pretty much stuck with Windows.

Pros with 2) Can use Linux. Standard Configuration, more secure, never leaves the hospital. Cons with 2) theft, breakage, competition to get it, isn't personal.

Pros with 3) The best of 1 and 2. Cons with 3: the worst of 1 and 2.

Thoughts?

-- IV

On Sep 18, 12:11 pm, "Ignacio Valdes" <ival...@hal-pc.org> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Has anyone done multi-user, one computer CPRS oriented Windows > workstations? If so, can you share your experience? We probably need > about 30 workstations running from probably 12 PC's. An ideal solution > would be to run 4-6 stations from one PC. Has anyone done this > recently? In principle this should be possible with USB hubs, USB > keyboards and mice and additional PCI video cards. There are multiple > examples of doing this using Linux for desktop (see below) but there > does not appear to be as much for Windows (see below) and doesn't > appear to have much for what we will probably end up using for the > client due to local conditions. Our WorldVistA server is Fedora 9 > based.

> Linux:http://linuxgazette.net/124/smith.html[linuxgazette.net]http://www.google.com/search?q=multiseat+x[google.com]http://cs.senecac.on.ca/~ctyler/ruby/[senecac.on.ca]http://blog.chris.tylers.info/index.php?/archives/ > 14-Multiseat-X-Under-X11R6.97.0.html [tylers.info]http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2005120700126OSDTHL [linuxtoday.com]http://www2.userful.com/

> Windows:http://www.ncomputing.com/http://www.elecomsystems.com

Reply to author   Forward You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Discussion subject changed to "New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!?" by Wolfgang Giere Wolfgang Giere View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 11:59 am From: Wolfgang Giere <W.Gi...@t-online.de> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:59:10 +0200 Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 11:59 am Subject: [Hardhats] New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Mumps Users' Group Germany (MUG-D) was alarmed by a member that Microsoft planned to include a new programming language "M" in "Visual Studio 2010". The link to the German message is http://www.golem.de/0810/62894.html

German:"Microsoft arbeitet an neuer Programmiersprache M M soll in Visual Studio 2010 enthalten sein"

Question to the experts: Is "M" or "M-Technology" copyrighted or trademarked? Should a MUG (which one?) take Actions? Or should we just joke ...

Wolfgang Giere

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Nancy Anthracite View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 12:41 pm From: Nancy Anthracite <nanthrac...@verizon.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:41:59 -0400 Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 12:41 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Did the article say that they were aware of the REAL M?

On Saturday 18 October 2008, Wolfgang Giere wrote:

> Mumps Users' Group Germany (MUG-D) was alarmed by a member that Microsoft > planned to include a new programming language "M" in "Visual Studio 2010". > The link to the German message is http://www.golem.de/0810/62894.html

> German:"Microsoft arbeitet an neuer Programmiersprache M > M soll in Visual Studio 2010 enthalten sein"

> Question to the experts: Is "M" or "M-Technology" copyrighted or > trademarked? Should a MUG (which one?) take Actions? Or should we just joke > ...

> Wolfgang Giere

-- Nancy Anthracite

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Wolfgang Giere View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 3:25 pm From: Wolfgang Giere <W.Gi...@t-online.de> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 22:25:40 +0200 Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 3:25 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Am Samstag, 18. Oktober 2008 19:41 schrieb Nancy Anthracite:

> Did the article say that they were aware of the REAL M?

No, not at all.

Wolfgang

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Ben Mehling View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 4:03 pm From: "Ben Mehling" <ben.mehl...@medsphere.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:03:40 -0700 Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 4:03 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author First "Vista" and now "M" -- they want it all! :-)

- Ben

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Wolfgang Giere <W.Gi...@t-online.de> wrote:

> Am Samstag, 18. Oktober 2008 19:41 schrieb Nancy Anthracite: >> Did the article say that they were aware of the REAL M?

> No, not at all.

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Steven McPhelan View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 5:10 pm From: "Steven McPhelan" <smcphe...@alumni.uci.edu> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:10:17 -0400 Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 5:10 pm Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Does any legal entity still exist that owns the copyright (if it exists) to M or M Technology?

On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Wolfgang Giere <W.Gi...@t-online.de> wrote:

> Am Samstag, 18. Oktober 2008 19:41 schrieb Nancy Anthracite: > > Did the article say that they were aware of the REAL M?

> No, not at all.

> Wolfgang

-- Steve "People who are brutally honest get more satisfaction out of the brutality than out of the honesty." -- Peter F. Drucker

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Fernando Telesca View profile More options Oct 18 2008, 6:55 pm From: Fernando Telesca <fernando.tele...@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Local: Sat, Oct 18 2008 6:55 pm Subject: Re: New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author Here´s another link:

http://thecoffeedesk.com/news/index.php/archives/74

Fernando

On 18 out, 19:10, "Steven McPhelan" <smcphe...@alumni.uci.edu> wrote:

- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - > Does any legal entity still exist that owns the copyright (if it exists) to > M or M Technology?

> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Wolfgang Giere <W.Gi...@t-online.de> wrote:

> > Am Samstag, 18. Oktober 2008 19:41 schrieb Nancy Anthracite: > > > Did the article say that they were aware of the REAL M?

> > No, not at all.

> > Wolfgang

> -- > Steve > "People who are brutally honest get more satisfaction out of the brutality > than out of the honesty." -- Peter F. Drucker

Reply to author   Forward Report spam Reporting spam Message reported Rate this post: Text for clearing space You must Sign in before you can post messages. To post a message you must first join this group. Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting. You do not have the permission required to post. Brian Lord View profile More options Oct 19 2008, 7:47 am From: Brian Lord <brianl...@nc.rr.com> Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 08:47:58 -0400 Local: Sun, Oct 19 2008 7:47 am Subject: Re: [Hardhats] Re: New Programming Language "M" from Microsoft!? Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

I know we all refer to MUMPS as M because it was an attempt to make MUMPS more proper sounding. However was any work ever done to copywrite M at all? I think the Microsoft folks have probably done their homework and recognize they are stepping on toes, but also probably know there is no legal wall to them using this name.

However with GT.M and Cache clearly not using the name, it seems that is just a legacy name (like DSM, MSM, GreyStone, etc.) that will go the way of history.

It also sounds like Microsoft M will be nothing more than a way to force users to use MS SQL.

Anyway this is probably a fight that unless someone has a legal document, or unless WorldVistA officially protests in the Media will be a losing battle.

- Hide quoted text -

All content is owned by its respective author/poster