Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Business Sun Microsystems

British Health System Looks at Linux 477

Posted by michael from the stop-the-spread-of-viruses dept.
DanBrusca writes "The Observer is reporting that Britain's biggest employer, the National Health Service, may ditch Microsoft due to mounting licence costs. 'Richard Granger, NHS IT director, has ordered a trial of a Linux-based system from Sun Microsystems as part of a UKP2.3 billion computer modernisation plan. The plan could see Java Desktop software rolled out across the NHS's 1 million staff and 800,000 computers to replace Microsoft's Windows operating system and Office suite of programmes.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

British Health System Looks at Linux More

British Health System Looks at Linux

Comments Filter:
  • What happens to the doctors who want to keep using Windows?

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:09AM (#7657679)
      They will be un-assimilated

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MoonFog ( 586818 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:09AM (#7657681)
      How many Slashdotters would prefer Linux, but have to use Windows at work ?

      It's not up to the employers most of the time to decide. My guess is nothing happens unless they have a radical view at things and threaten quit quit if they have to switch.

      • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by martinX ( 672498 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:31AM (#7657779)

        Of the doctors in my hospital who know what an OS is, Linux gets a mention more often than not as a preferred platform.

        Most people here run basic MS Office apps (and usually run them basically) and connect to legacy databases using terminals. Some people make their own Access databases but the IT people really hate that - you know how it goes: individual makes DB in Access, time passes, undocumented and poorly implemented Access database becomes the lynchpin of a Ward, originator leave, everyone's up shit creek.

        We are migrating from '95 to XP and everyone is getting lots of training. This training could just as easily have been applied to Linus apps.

        • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Sad Loser ( 625938 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:53AM (#7657988)

          This certainly occurs, and I have been guilty myself, but it only happens because the IT people are so useless.

          I would say that they are overworked, but they're not, they are just incompetent. (this is partly because health in the UK has yet to recognise IT as a core business skill, and pay accordingly)

      • Locked in to Windows (Score:5, Informative)

        by charnov ( 183495 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:44AM (#7657834) Homepage Journal
        Actually it's not Windows that I am locked into at work, it's Office.

        I have yet to find a way to get past Exchange and Citrix effectively. We looked at a few solutions that cames close, but the administration costs FAR outweighed the licensing savings (although Citrix licenses are astronomical). The other problem is that our document management system (necessary by law due to Sarbanes-Oxley Act) is iManage which only works with office and costs $75K.
        • If you were using unix/linux, then there would be no market for Citrix..... X is network aware, so you could use remote apps, as if they were local. Citrix is just a hack to attempt to bring the same functionality to windows.
          • Citrix is just a hack to attempt to bring the same functionality to windows

            Say that, but apps running over the Citrix protocol are a hell of a lot faster than X apps. ESPECIALLY over slow network links. Citrix' number one heralded feature is good compression.

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:10AM (#7657687) Homepage Journal
      What happens to the doctors who want to keep using Windows?

      since when do end users get a say in their operating system? the doctors have the exact same amount of choice with the linux system that they had with the windows system: zero.

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:4, Informative)

      by tempest303 ( 259600 ) <jensknutson AT yahoo DOT com> on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:14AM (#7657706) Homepage
      Maybe they get the same answer as people get right now who want to use Linux instead of Windows at work:

      "Tough shit, pal."

      If they are concerned about interoperability between work and home, OpenOffice runs great on Linux *and* Windows, y'know. :)

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Informative)

      by InadequateCamel ( 515839 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:24AM (#7657748)
      The doctors don't use Windows, their secretaries do. In fact, several of the doctors whom I typed for used Macs whenever they could, using the Windows box only when they needed to get patient information from the network.

      When I worked there most of my work was word processing (Word 97), email (GroupWise...wise my ass) and accessing online patient records through a terminal. All of this can be done on any platform, except I suspect that few of them crash as consistently and spectacularly (sp?) as a Windows 95 installation.

      I am sure that there are specific, necessary programs in use that are Windows-based, but I am also sure that it would not be the first time that they had to write new software for their special requirements (the aforementioned ICSIS (sp) program for checking patient info, for example)

    • It's easy they can... (Score:5, Funny)

      by spineboy ( 22918 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:24AM (#7657751) Journal
      Set up their office any-way they want. One of my colleagues just set up his office about a year ago. I advised him to go with Apple for ease of use, but he wanted Windows - and promptly got hit with one of the big viruses, which shut down his office, until the hospitals computers were cleaned.

      He called me complaining that I should have tried harder to convince him to switch away from Windows.

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Soko ( 17987 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:26AM (#7657760) Homepage
      They learn and adapt to use the tools provided?

      I understand where you're coming from, friend - not wanting to take anyone's freedom away. However, a doctor's function is to heal patients, not architect Information Systems. As long as the systems put in place provide him with the information he or she needs, in the form needed when it is needed, there should be no problem at all, after the initial learning curve.

      As an IT professional, I know how to heal a sick computer, but for sick humans I refer them to a more much more qualified professional - a Doctor. The reverse should also be true.

      Soko

    • Re:Britain's biggest employer is Health? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I'm being pedantic, but the British NHS is not only Britain's biggest employer, it's Europe's biggest employer too.
    • Most GP's (family doctors) are "self-employed". They run their own practices or cooperate with other doctors to create small health centres. While they are paid by the NHS they still effectively run their own business. They can use whatever computer systems they like.

      When the NHS is referred to in articles like this they generally mean the hospital system. I doubt most doctors in a NHS hospital even so much as look at a computer. Most of the terminal work will be done by nurses and admin staff.

      IMHO this

    • Here's a good one. At my local hospital they used to use X11 apps and xterms for their patient software.

      Well, they modernized, guess what they use now? WinXP machines with X11 server software, accesing the exact same X11 app they used before.

      Now that's progress!

  • first china... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:07AM (#7657672) Homepage Journal
    now the british health system... it's amazing how the same operating system that cio's thought of as a science project a year ago can get the big contracts with nothing more than a respectable corporate name on the outside of the box.

    • Re:first china... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by October_30th ( 531777 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:11AM (#7657696) Homepage Journal
      with nothing more than a respectable corporate name on the outside of the box.

      Maybe it's because that corporation provides services like an on-site support contract?

      • Re:first china... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Coryoth ( 254751 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:25AM (#7657756) Homepage Journal
        with nothing more than a respectable corporate name on the outside of the box.

        Maybe it's because that corporation provides services like an on-site support contract?

        To be fair though, there have been several Linux companies (Redhat and SUSE most prominent) that have offered support contracts. When Sun offers pretty much the same thing people take notice - it's amazing what a anme can do. Especially when you not that Sun is in decline (not irreversible, but let's face it, they haven't been doing quite so well the last few quarters) while Redhat and SUSE are both pushing ahead.

        It will be interesting to see if uptake of Sun's Linux distro will see Redhat and SUSE's fortunes improve further - they are big names in the linux business, so if linux gets to be a name of note, all of a sudden they could start making some big contracts.

        Jedidiah

  • when will it stop (Score:5, Interesting)

    by prof187 ( 235849 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:08AM (#7657674) Homepage
    Linux is an 'open-source' system for running computers invented by a young Finnish student in 1991 and refined by thousands of programmers working together across the internet.

    how long until they stop seeing it necessary to give linux a definition? i kinda wonder why they feel like 'quoting' open-source in this too, do they think they're lying? =D

    • Re:when will it stop (Score:5, Funny)

      by dankdirk77 ( 690855 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:13AM (#7657705)
      Yeah I didn't see

      Windows is a 'closed-source' system for wrecking computers stolen by a young American student in the early 80s and rejected by thousands of programmers working together across the internet.

    • Re:when will it stop (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Hi_2k ( 567317 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:15AM (#7657713) Journal
      The problem is, most people dont yet understand the diffrence between a monitor and a computer, so why should they understand the diffrence between operating systems? Linux still has never gotten mass media coverage in any real way. Until the 6'oclock news or the NY Times frontpage have in depth coverage of the fact that other operating systems exist, the average person, even the average high income person, will not understand that Linux is a (generally) better proposition than windows or that it is even another proposition.
      • Even when that happens, people still won't because people are stupid.

  • How exactly is this a true statement? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sithkhan ( 536425 ) <sithkhan@gmail.com> on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:09AM (#7657680)
    Charles Andrews, Sun Microsystem's public sector head, said licence cost savings would come to tens of millions of pounds directly. 'And we won't force people to upgrade computers and technology on a 2-3 year cycle either. Customers can upgrade when they need to,' he said.

    Not a troll, but Linux is immune from upgrades? This is not the way to convince people to use Linux, by implying that once you install/download Linux, you can walk away without any more upgrades. I wish he had been more clear about the costs involved instead of being so vague.

    • Re:How exactly is this a true statement? (Score:5, Informative)

      by afidel ( 530433 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:19AM (#7657728)
      I think he is talking about the fact that under MS Liscensing 6 that you MUST upgrade certain components every X months or you lose the very expensive support you were paying for. Basically Sun is saying that they are willing to support an older configuration so long as you are willing to pay the bills. With MS that is not an option. In some instances it may be MUCH cheaper to pay a little more for software support than it is to upgrade all the hardware and pay for all of the technicians to do the upgrades. This isn't necessarily the best path all the time but if budgets are going to be lean for a year or two keeping the old systems on life support can often be a wise choice.
    • I myself used StarOffice 5.2 happily for years on a Pentium 166 machine. I imagine that lots of these hospital computers will be running just word processing and spreadsheets. And of course connecting to databases. This will work as long as the hardware isn't fried in most of cases.

      You will be able to open OpenOffice 3 documents with OpenOffice 1.1 I am guessing. That is not an option with Word or Excel from my previous experience.

    • Re:How exactly is this a true statement? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mcc ( 14761 ) <amcclure@purdue.edu> on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:48AM (#7657844) Homepage
      Well, first off, if you look, he isn't saying the Linux means no-forced-upgrades-ever. He's saying that the overall Linux-based system which Sun is selling means no-forced-upgrades-ever. And this is valid as a sales point for Sun, no? I mean, historically, Sun has shown itself to be far more willing to provide support for "obsoleted" Sun software products than many other companies (in particular MS, the obvious target of the "2-3 year cycle" barb) have for their products, no?

      However, for the sake of argument: if you look in general at a Linux-based system like this one versus a Microsoft-based solution, you will indeed find it is true that the Linux-based solution will be far less susceptible to forced upgrades. This is because Microsoft has two covert methods by which it forces upgrades:
      • Associated software. If you go with the MS OS, you're probably going to be going with other MS software as well, for example Word. If you want to do this, you're going to continuously over time upgrade Word, both because MS continuously updates Word, and because you will have to keep upgrading Word in order to work with the new-version Word documents people send you. Over time this means that you will have to eventually upgrade your OS as well in order to run the newest version of Word. That sort of thing. With a Linux solution, you have access to the code and have the ability if you need to to (in an analogous situation) alter the OpenOffice and/or Linux itself so that a newer version of OpenOffice runs on an older version of Linux, or add support for newer document formats to the older OpenOffice you were running.
      • Hardware upgrades. Over time, what if you want to perform partial hardware upgrades on some of your systems, or add new systems, but you wish to keep your network homogenous from a software standpoint? If MS does not choose to continue to add support to its OS for new hardware, and they often do not, then what do you do? You will be unable to work with the new hardware without performing an upgrade. With the Linux solution you have the ability to add support for new hardware yourself if the vendor chooses not to.
      Both of these cases imply on the Linux side changes to the code, which is a sort of upgrade. However the open source model provides the *possibility* of doing minor upgrades to bring over crucial new features, rather than (say) having to upgrade all the way to WinXP from W2K, with all the baggage that implies, just to get one tiny little feature. Moreover they give you a large degree of flexibility in your choice of vendors. If the British health system needs changes to the system they are using, they may go to Sun and purchase the upgrade, OR they can hire an independent contractor of their choice, point them at the code, and say "add these features".

      And note that with everything I have said here, you can replace "Linux" with "Open Source" and "MS" with "Closed Source" and it works just fine.
    • I help convert two offices with about 40 employees each from Win to Linux. One of the major reason was it would work on their ageing ~PIII 700Mhz with 256MB of ram without any issues. We chose SuSE for one and RH for the other and when they need new hardware, they can go get white boxes from tigerdirect or whomever running like 1.2 Ghz AMD chips for under $300 and be happy for many years to come. Barring hardware failures, that should extend their current technology's use by another 2 - 3 years. Our com

  • Sweet.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Trelane ( 16124 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:09AM (#7657684) Journal
    Everyone in the world seems to be evaluating Linux on the desktop. And why not? It makes perfect sense. At most, you get a viable alternative to Microsoft; at worst, you get discounts from Microsoft.

    Well, let me correct that. Everyone in the world but in the United States. Why is it that the US companies and organizations (starting with the ^$!* Universities!) are the only ones blind to the potential of FOSS (and the interaction between FOSS and a RAIS (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Students) hacking on it!), or at least to the fact that Microsoft will give them a discount if they at least look at the competition?

    • Re:Sweet.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by dankdirk77 ( 690855 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:17AM (#7657723)
      Actually, it's hard to see but many US hospitals are slowly moving away from M$. This is done in many cases because of IBM who come in and sell Linux for its openness and auditability; which is in demand in the wake of the HIPAA regulations.

      I agree about the universities, Microsoft is doing the RIAA thing and trying to buy their way into the classrooms for a propaganda war. Sad really that this goes under the radar to most people.

    • Re:Sweet.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Malcontent ( 40834 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @03:14AM (#7658026)
      A few years ago most of the hospitals and schools in the US were running on unix boxes and mainframes with dumb or X terminals. Then somebody made the fateful decision to get rid of all those terminals and install windows instead.

      Chances are very good that the person who made that decision is still in the same position. To now make a decision to move away from windows would be like admitting that you were wrong when you made a decision to move to windows in the first place. A CIO would rather die then to lose face like that.

      American schools and hospitals will not even condier switching unless there is a turnover in the CIO position.

    • Re:Sweet.... (Score:4, Funny)

      by matvei ( 568098 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @07:16AM (#7658664)

      (starting with the ^$!* Universities!)

      You know that you're a geek when you spend some time wondering what that regexp does.

  • Row (Score:5, Interesting)

    by marshall_j ( 643520 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:10AM (#7657686) Homepage
    The National Health Service, Britain's biggest employer, is considering ditching Microsoft software after a row over mounting licensing costs.
    What's the chance that MS will be offering them a heavily discounted plan after this.
    I might be a little cynical but could it just be the NHS trying to get a better deal from MS?

    • Re:Row (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Soko ( 17987 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:43AM (#7657830) Homepage
      I might be a little cynical but could it just be the NHS trying to get a better deal from MS?

      And why the hell wouldn't they? That's one of the reasons I've gotten into FOSS - I want a big stick with which to beat Microsoft into submission with.

      It's called competition, friend. Every time someone uses FOSS to get deep discounts on Windows and/or Office, it takes just a little more steam out of the Microsoft steamroller. I hate to wish ill on anyone, but this is good for the IT industry, IMHO.

      It also makes a business case for evaluating FOSS, putting it into the minds (if not the hearts) of the PHBs. It will become a more common thing to have Linux installs, which will cause Microsoft's customers to make them conform to standards that everyone can live with.

      All around, there is no downside here. Your cynicism is born from impatience, of wanting FOSS to win NOW. Patience, friend, and keep a clear head - intelligence, not emotion, is what we need to use in order to restore innovation and freedom to the industry.

      Soko

    • Re:Row (Score:4, Insightful)

      by snero3 ( 610114 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:07AM (#7657900) Homepage
      I might be a little cynical but could it just be the NHS trying to get a better deal from MS?

      I would be willing to bet that you are not far off on that point. It costs a fare amount for a large organisation like that to move from one application to another let alone a whole OS. You have to consider all the retraining of stuff + installition cost etc.. I would be willing to bet that 50-60% of the big corporations that have treaten to go to linux have just done so to screw a better deal of MS

  • Finally! Sun has a strategy... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chordonblue ( 585047 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:12AM (#7657699) Journal
    And you know what? It looks as though it's working. Getting their desktop act together combined with StarOffice and excellent support may help Sun out of it's doldrums after all.

    I have to admit that I wasn't sold on the 'Java' desktop (whatever), but it seems that they are pushing the right buttons here.

  • not important... my comment that is (Score:5, Interesting)

    by POds ( 241854 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:13AM (#7657703) Homepage Journal
    Sun seem to have done the right thing, at the right time. I assume the Java Desktop thingo doesnt have huge licence fees, because then there would be no point in people using it, if their sole reason was to get away from Microsoft!

    Good on Sun! Someone had to do it, and really, who else could have pulled it off? And dont say Apple :)

    Great, Grand, Wonderful... Everybody on the BUS!

  • And headlines later this week on slashdot: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:17AM (#7657721)
    • British Health System Then Looks Away From Linux, Embarrased
    • British Health System Asks Linux to Put On Some Clothes
    • Linux Throws On a Spaghetti-Strap Dress and Comments Mockingly on Stodgy Brits
    • British Health System, Now Somewhat Flustered, Looks At Linux Again
    • Linux Says, So Is That A Router In Your Pocket Or Are You Just Glad to See Me
    • Linux Throws On a Spaghetti-Strap Dress and Comments Mockingly on Stodgy Brits

      I'd rather be slightly plump, well-fed and contented than scrawny, edgy and looking like an emaciated anorexic skeleton to conform to your Hollywood stereotype thank you very much. Those "tart's breakfasts" will catch up with you one day...

  • Linux for front end machines? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Alystair ( 617164 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:17AM (#7657724)
    As much as I like Linux, the front end needs to mature a bit before going into such a high risk environment where, most of the time, every second is a matter of life and death.

    • Re:Linux for front end machines? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:23AM (#7657744)
      You are 100% correct. However the life and death machines have never run Windows or Linux, and almost certainly never will. They are very strictly the domain of Real Time Operating Systems and embedded systems. (QNX comes to mind, but I'm not 100% sure if it's ever been used in medical equipment).

      The rollout will be for generic office type machines, noting lab results, appointments, taking notes, rosters, and that hundred and one other, non-life-and-death uses.

      • Re:Linux for front end machines? (Score:5, Informative)

        by outZider ( 165286 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:07AM (#7657899) Homepage
        Wrong.

        Some medical companies, names upon request, use Windows NT as the OS that runs their diagnostic and monitoring devices.

        Many come with a warning to restart the device daily.

        No joke.
        • Generally those are medical device applications where there are conditions that nobody observes in an 'IT' setting, and certainly not in the 'home' setting that many people have anecdotal experience in.

          The hardware platform is a specific configuration. Nothing is added, nothing changes. The specific hardware combination that makes up the system is fixed, and has been rigorously tested as a system.

          The software on the machine is a specific configuration. Nothing can be added by the operator, and the ent

  • Java Desktop System name (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zymano ( 581466 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:21AM (#7657735)
    Linux Desktop System would be more accurate. Don't you think ? Don't forget . Sun is payrolling SCO by paying that IP license and has always distrusted linux. Ripping the nametag Linux off the OS software and replacing it with a Java title is something a greedy company would do.
    • "Ripping the nametag Linux off the OS software and replacing it with a Java title is something a greedy company would do."

      Maybe, but I like to think more of it as something that a company that wants to MAKE MONEY would do. You'll recall, that's why companies often do this sort of thing.

      The real question is: WHY?

      Answer: To not only sell customers on the the desktop, but on the backend server architecture as well. The word 'Java' helps Sun distinguish itself from every other Linux distro.

      You watch, Novell

  • Not too surprising when you look at the numbers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by strider3700 ( 109874 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:25AM (#7657754)
    If anything I'm surprised that this doesn't happen more often. The license savings on 800,000 machines should come to a number that you have to an idiot to not seriously look into.

    Where as the license savings on the 20 machines at work comes to a small enough amount we don't decide it's worth porting the one program we require on windows so we don't think about it much. We also however don't upgrade very often, 10 95's 5 98's and a few others just for testing purposes.

    Now having said this, we're moving our product to linux, partially for the higher margins we can get when we don't have to pay license fees on the servers we sell and partially because the old OS is expensive garbage that should have been retired 10 years ago. The massive number of free tools helps with the move, and the advertising push people like IBM have been doing really helps with the customers and the boss. I actually saw my first Linux /IBM commercial on TV today. Not there standard E-server commercials, but just on the merits of Linux.

    The workplace is definitely changing and it's not at all like I guessed it would be 10 years ago when I started school.

  • It's bizarre this is a Central Govt. matter (Score:3, Insightful)

    by palfreman ( 164768 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:28AM (#7657769) Homepage
    Yes, of course its a good thing that they are looking at Linux, but it is wholly bizzare that these kind of things are still centerally planned in England, and that these kind of day-to-day technical decisions are made by a government minister in Whitehall and distributed down the hiereachy - presumably all the way to the cleaning in the end.

    This is a result of previous government directives to start looking at Linux solutions [silicon.com] in the government. This is something that has not trickled down all the officials to get as far as being a policy announcement in the left wing press here (of which the Observer [observer.co.uk] is just one example.

    Obviously this is a better situation than before, when government directives insisted that Microsoft solutions be looked at first, so far as anyone can tell simply because Tony Blair did not understand computers but did enjoy Bill Gates' company when they met - they are a similar age, and see themselves as similar global figures, and I personally think they have a similar contemptable attitude to people who are ultimately their paymasters. Now Tony Blair is politically weaker, following the recent Gulf war not being popular within the Labour Party [labour.org.uk], but really it would be better if this was happening according to other reasons.

  • Incomplete Headline (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dr. Photo ( 640363 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:28AM (#7657771) Journal
    The story was supposed to read:

    "British Health System Looks at Linux; Tells it to Quit Smoking and Exercise More" ;-)

  • About time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AirLace ( 86148 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:33AM (#7657788)
    The UK government spends millions on institutions like universities allowing them to research and develop all sorts of free software, ranging from kernel security features (StegFS, Cambridge) to userspace applications like text-to-speech (Festival TTS, Edinburgh) and VoIP (VIC, UCL). It only makes sense that they should reap the benefits. Why pay twice for something?

  • Bah! (Score:5, Funny)

    by use_compress ( 627082 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:34AM (#7657797) Journal
    The last thing you want is an obese penguin giving you health advice.

  • "Trusted" computing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by InadequateCamel ( 515839 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:34AM (#7657798)
    I can't wait until Longhorn is running on my hospital's computers so that I can feel secure in the knowledge that Microsoft is busy backing up and securing my health records on their personal servers...

  • Let's see what happens next (Score:5, Insightful)

    by melted ( 227442 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:36AM (#7657806) Homepage
    Select one of the choices below:
    1. They threaten Microsoft and get their deep discount. Smart.
    2. They buy into Sun and pay dearly for support as well as for rewriting all of their already working software. Stupid.

    Somehow I think the entire point of this "switch" is to do #1.
    • I'm sure the "Java Desktop" or any other Linux disto has all the desktop software that 95% percent of office workers need. If they had millions of custom VB apps running on there desktops they probably wouldn't be looking at switching to Linux. All the in-house corporate desktop apps I've seen written in the last 5 years have been either web or Java based.

  • I'm all for this but... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JohnnyKlunk ( 568221 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:39AM (#7657819)
    My wife works for the NHS here in London. We dual-boot here and she finds linux too difficult. She's OK to read email and the like but installation of hardware or software is just too difficult under linux for your average NHS worker (not that they're stupid, they just know about other things).

    I see it in every linux debate I read - this will only succeed when linux becomes easier to use. No more editing obscure text files or reading howto's. Things just have "to work" before people will change

    (OK, things don't always "just work" in MS, but mostly it does and people need some incentive to sell them on a change like that).

    • Re:I'm all for this but... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AirLace ( 86148 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:04AM (#7657888)
      Why would an NHS worker have to install hardware or software? This is what the NHS would pay Sun for, and Sun would probably implement a centrally managed system rather than sending round technicians to update each workstation individually.

    • I'm all for this! (Score:5, Informative)

      by robjs ( 724390 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:25AM (#7657946)
      My parents are both currently working in the NHS, my Dad's a consultant at the local hospital, whereas my Mum's a GP.

      The way that they use computers (mainly for work) is fairly simple. My Dad will use some form of presentation building software - for preparing talks at meetings, a web browser - for filling in his "education" points list, and a word processor - for writing letters. That's it - for work both at home and at the hospital where he works. I've found that once the computer has Linux installed on it, he's got no real problems (using GNOME as a Window Manager) doing this tasks. He likes StarOffice Impress, and he's commented that Galeon is faster than Internet Explorer.

      My Mum, is generally the same, she needs a scanner - for preparing practice booklets, or information leaflets, a word processor, an email client, and that's about it. At work, she says, I just "put in my password, click OK, and then click on the program icon". Now, that's not something that'd be hard to implement on Linux. Also, being part of a General Practice, they have to purchase their own computers, and software. She has commented before on the cost of the software, and how it seems to be "paying a lot for not very much".

      My thoughts? Can Linux be implemented as a desktop implementation for users? Definitely. The user does not need to install software, or hardware for that matter - they cannot at the moment, as they're not "administrators" on their own machines.

      Remote management would be easier, IMHO, and there'd be less problems with network floods due to virii that inevitably end up on the Windows systems.

      The Police in our area, West Yorkshire, UK, have already made the switch and are running their systems on Linux. This, to me, is an indicator of how Linux, when properly implemented, can be used on the desktop. If the NHS do come up with a decent solution, I'd imagine they'll see the benefits (probably mainly cost benefits).
      This post is based purely on personal experience

  • Wouldn't it be more accurate... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pixelgeek ( 676892 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:42AM (#7657826)
    It seems that NHS is looking at *Sun* and their tech support and not Linux.

    As others have pointed out this isn't a victory for Linux...Sun isn't exactly the biggest fan of penguin branded OS and kernels. Heck they don't even call it Linux.

  • Let's take a moment to think about this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @01:47AM (#7657842)
    This is great. Linux has gone from a university project in a country which has never had an empire to moving in on the largest software company in the world, all within a little over ten years. This is awesome achievement. Here on /. we spend a lot of time griping about not being able to cut and paste between KDE and Gnome apps, and complaining about the fact that the latest wireless card doesn't have a driver in Debian Unstable, etc, but let's take a moment to think about how awesome this is, thank those who made it happen (Linus and a cast of millions) and also think about what we are doing as part of it. Writing a new device driver? Helping a friend set it up? Or posting as AC on /.? Whatever it is, we have to give back to it somehow.

  • The only thing they need to know... (Score:4, Funny)

    by rock_climbing_guy ( 630276 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:04AM (#7657885) Journal
    I wonder what Clippy would think about them considering Linux. When they try to delete him, we might try to shut down the ICU just to remind 3v3ry1 that bi11 0wnz j00.

  • Standardising the NHS OS (Score:4, Informative)

    by mr_lithic ( 563105 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:05AM (#7657891) Homepage Journal
    Hopefully this will bring some standardised OS to the NHS, currently Britain's biggest employer 1.2 Million.

    It is impossible to remove all of the Windows boxes and replace them with Linux Desktops and Open Office, but it may start some standardisation in an outfit that has every Windows OS from MSDos 6.2 to Windows XP (including a lot of stops along the way, 3.1 and ME).

    For those using machines that do not require Windows, I see no problem in switching to a Linux Desktop. Or site uses Novell as well for the backend, so Linux is definitely in our future.

  • I know Microsoft is expensive, but... (Score:4, Funny)

    by DeathPenguin ( 449875 ) * on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:17AM (#7657928)
    Wait a second, they're turning to Sun to save money? *Scratches head*

  • Not a hope in hell (Score:5, Informative)

    by sane? ( 179855 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @03:50AM (#7658087)
    They have just finished arranging the contract with big consulting concerns for new IT for everyone. Those offerings are significantly predicated on Microsoft. Plus there are old DOS apps still in use.

    This is pure dealing with Microsoft, there is not a hope that Linux will be generally taken on.

    And Microsoft will recognise that too.

    If they had wanted to take it seriously, they would have required Linux solutions when they put out the original tender in April. They didn't.

  • Realistically? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by EvilNutSack ( 700432 ) <{juhapearson} {at} {gmail.com}> on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:06AM (#7658124)
    Having to work alongside NHS IT Support, I would have to say it's rather unlikely that there will be a mass migration to Linux. Firstly, they are still moving onto Win2K and many machines are on 95/98 ( a) they won't ditch years of work even for savings and b) to do so would be to admit that they made a costly error). Secondly, do you know how hard it is to get hold of medical staff in the first place? It's unfeasible to just walk in and upgrade them to a completely different system; the support calls will go through the roof. The staff will need to be kept in the 'loop' during the whole process. Finally, the 'culture' of the users in the NHS is that they are pretty resistant to change, even upgrading their browser from IE5 to 6 can take weeks! Some are still using Eudora 3.0!

    • Re:Realistically? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by vidarh ( 309115 )
      On the other hand, this resistance to change is a major plus for Sun in this case. With Microsoft agressively end-of-life'ing their products faster and faster, they are now in a position where they either go onto a perpetual upgrade carousel where they'll find it difficult to even complete one upgrade cycle before having to start the next, or they make one painful transition, which they can stage over time, and then they can set their own pace.

  • its about time too! (computer virus problems) (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @04:20AM (#7658160)
    hopefully moving to Linux will help combat the problems various NHS trusts had with recent computer virus attacks - I know of one Trust where for weeks access to online medical records was only possible for a short amount of time every day.. makes one wonder how big the human cost of computer viruses is..

  • personally I think this is brill... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by advocate_one ( 662832 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @05:52AM (#7658432)
    because it will create a big demand for those with Linux skills to support those boxes. And I for one intend to be at the front of the queue... and deity help any MCSE waver who thinks he can jump it...

  • Many Info Systems are Unix based (Score:5, Informative)

    by plcurechax ( 247883 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:06AM (#7658847) Homepage
    Many of the patient electronic records information systems are already Unix based (Data General's Unix DG/UX, Solaris, SunOS, Digital Unix/Tru64, SCO UnixWare, HP/UX, and I think we few others I forgot). I use to develop one of the major ones.

    When I joined one of the private companies which only provides medical IS software, I wasted a month realising that the Linux based solution I was developing wouldn't be accepted because the NHS Trust wanted a Windows based solution. So I spent a week trying to understand and get actual prices and sources for discounted licenses for Microsoft's server software. A quarter of the budget for this project involving custom software went to Microsoft license fees.

    The reason it had to be Windows? A serious systemic lack of resources and skills. Any IT personnel working for the NHS who has enough skills to administer a Unix machine (or has actually completed their MCSE exams even) ends up taking a better paying job elsewhere. So the NHS Trusts end up relying on untrained IT staff and nurses who have moved into IT to get away from shift work. Nevermind the fact there was a 2 to 1 ratio of managers to tehnical staff (yes, 2 managers, 1 system administrator).

    I have never seen such a screwed up system on such a large scale before. It is almost impressive just how broken the NHS IA / IT is.
    • More on that custom software, it was a windows program to generate content for the NHS Trust intranet site that they were required (by NHS IA and the UK govt's e-Envoy) to have.

      When I did a presentation the doctors and admins were really excited about it. Not about our software or the intranet, but they thought this meant that the dumb terminals that they had in their offices or work areas were going to be replaced with PCs. To their disappointment they weren't. No budget was allocated for PC upgrades. So

  • It can happen (Score:3, Insightful)

    by grundie ( 220908 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @03:55PM (#7662284)
    I work for a large British railway infrastrucure provider, i.e. Network Rail!

    We are are on the slippery slope to adopting Linux.

    A lot of our internal finance systems are being switched over to the Oracle/Java E-business suite on Linux servers.

    OK we are still on NT 4 desktops (we are very, very conservative as regards IT infrastructure). We will switch to Win2K desktops eventually. However, what happens after that is anyones guess. We already stripped Unisys of their IT support contract to save money, all our IT staff are now in-house. Linux does seem the next logical step. Several senior IT staff have hinted to me that wide-scale Linux adoption may be the next step they take.

    We want cheap, very cheap. If we can train our own in-house IT staff to support Linux without having to pay outside companies then all the well.

    Once companies realise that they can have a comprehensive and reliable IT infrastructure based on Linux, without havong to employ an outside firm such as Sun or IBM then Linux will become a big thing.

    And as far as I am concerned the sooner the better!

Slashdot Top Deals

"The medium is the message." -- Marshall McLuhan

Close