The core functionality (server/engine) is exactly what I'm refering to and not the CPRS interface. The interface is the link between the backend and the user. If there is to be any functionality or interoperatability enhancements made to this program then it will have to happen in the core fucntionality first.

The WorldVista sourceforge site states that the primary language is MUMPS.

Even Robert McFarland, CIO of the VA, has stated that Vista is outdated and expensive to maintain.

"VistA also was written in a computer language called MUMPS, which is rarely taught. Finding programmers to maintain and upgrade VistA has proven expensive, the VA says."

• Re: Don't isolate Vista from software community by Alfred Smith on Thursday November 03, 2005 @ 02:17 PM

  The reason for the VA's difficulty modernizing Vista is a not a testament to the superiority of MUMPS but rather a testament to something in the sofware industry we call vendor lock-in. Conversions from older platforms are always a nightmare for enterprise organizations. They usually try to extend the life of their legacy systems as long as they can unitil they have no other choice. This is especially true with vendor lock-in. Also, better is not always defined in terms of speed but rather what products give you the option to choose what's right for you. There is much more involved with software than just how fast it is. With computing power getting cheaper and cheaper by the day it is easier for companies to just add more processing power and RAM in order to speed things up. More about vendor lock-in. The VA wants to move to a platform that they believe will make their job easier but they can't. Why? - because of lock-in. Imagine yourself in bad deal that you can't get out off. A good contract will give you the option to resolve it if you're later not satisfied with the terms of the agreement. The fact that the VA is finding it difficult to update is proof that this product has locked the VA into a marriage when the VA really wants out. Good software platforms give companies the choice to decide what is best for them at that time. Good platforms make it easy for companies to switch when they see another platform or product that has the benefits that they're seeking. This does not necesarily mean which is the fastest. Perhaps java or c++ vendors have rapid application development tools that will make it easier to update and maintain the system. Dr. Valdez, I think that you misunderstand where I'm coming from. I think that Vista is a great product and that it has tremendous potential to fix many problems in healthcare but I don't want the language platform its written on to get in the way of its future. It needs to be converted inorder to help it grow swiftly and healthy. Vista needs the entire sofware and healthcare community behind it in order to be successful. Respectfully, Alfred Smith

  [ Reply to this ]

• Re: Don't isolate Vista from software community by Ignacio Valdes, MD, MS on Thursday November 03, 2005 @ 02:47 PM

  Thanks again for your comments. One last rebuttal then I have to move on. One of the reasons the VA failed when they tried to modernize parts of VistA was because no database platform could perform as well or was grossly lacking in functionality. There is much less vendor lock-in with MUMPS as there are at least 2 suppliers for compilers, one of which (GT.M) is open source. Is the same true about Oracle? Microsoft? Any of the others? I think not. An analogy I've heard is that achieves a more accurate picture is that of the VistA system as a city that is being slowly rebuilt over time. This is what happens to all cities so that eventually the original buildings are gone or un-recognizable. Wholesale changes for there own sake are invitations to disaster. Fortunately, MUMPS and VistA are designed so that parts of the production system can be changed/modernized/upgraded/whatever as needed. -- IV

  [ Reply to this ]

• Re: Don't isolate Vista from software community by skoba on Thursday November 03, 2005 @ 11:54 PM

  How do you think about Cache'?

  [ Reply to this ]