|
Re: Conversion plans?
|
Malcolm Sickels
|
May 03, 2008 17:13 PDT
|
I agree that OsiriX works fine to read those CDs of studies that
patients bring in.
A Xserve at all is way overkill, as is 16GB of RAM and OS X Server.
As Theo and Stefan have said, the system requirements are fairly low.
No need for new equipment nor high-end stuff.
Note that I don't have experience with this (I'm still on FMP6 and CM
1.9.1), but unless you have a big hospital, I doubt the processing
requirements would be very high.
Dr. Malcolm Sickels, MD
210 Little Lake Drive, Suite 10
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
http://drsickels.com
734-332-9936
On May 3, 2008, at 12:50 PM, d c wrote:
| | Ok, i AM jealous! I have been debating a refurb Xserve vs. using my
tower. . . So is 16GB RAM the recommended amount?!?!? phew!
Do you like VM Ware Fusion (vs. Parallels)?
FYI - you may view your MRI/Xrays with this great Opensource program
called OsiriX. This will read the files and allow you to view them
as well on the Mac. The site is avail here: http://www.osirix-viewer.com/
Hope it helps.
dave
On May 2, 2008, at 7:07 PM, roger bailey wrote:
| | Thought I would comment here as I just upgraded to a MacPro with
Mac OS X Server (Leopard) and FM 9 Server.
The system is magnificent...I know it is overkill but I bought mine
with 16 GB of RAM - 2.8 dual 8 core - RAID 5 - 1.25 TB, with two
external HD (one for manual backup, the other for Time Machine).
Very very smooth.
One other side benefit is that I also installed VM Ware Fusion and
then Windows XP...this allows me to see MRI/Xrays that patients are
increasingly bringing in on CDs, but they can't be read on a MAC.
And this is no joke...Windows XP (and all the applications) run
faster on my MacPro than any PC I have ever owned (or seen).
R Bailey
--- On Fri, 5/2/08, d c <hhchun-@hawaiiantel.net> wrote:
| | From: d c <hhchun-@hawaiiantel.net>
Subject: Re: Conversion plans?
To: Cotta-@topica.com
Date: Friday, May 2, 2008, 7:45 PM
Hello Theo Gantos,
Sorry a bit late in this reply - ok, ok - a LOT late.
However, I was
looking to upgrade to Filemaker Pro Server. Regarding your
recommendations below, what would you recommend as
"sufficient RAM"
for a Mac OS X based system running OS X? How about OS X
Server?
As an aside, I was wondering if perhaps the Cottagemed.org
FAQ site
could be updated to save you time answering common
questions such as
mine above, comments such as below, latest version, planned
features,
etc. Just my two cents.
Thanks for "listening" and thank you in advance
for your reply.
dave
On Dec 10, 2007, at 4:51 AM, Theo Gantos wrote:
| | Dr. Sickels-
Based on the information you provided, I would suggest
|
that you plan
| | to migrate to the scenario outlined below. Note that
|
this will be
| | the main path for current CottageMed users to migrate
|
to the re-
| | written version 3 once it becomes available. [Stefan-
|
Did you have
| | any additional thoughts or comments on this?]
1. Plan to migrate to using FileMaker Server if at all
|
possible for
| | installations with greater than 2 users. This greatly
|
improves
| | performance and reliability, allowing backups to be
|
made while the
| | system is running on an automated schedule. FileMaker
|
Server can be
| | run on an older machine that is dedicated just for
|
that purpose, as
| | long as it has sufficient RAM, disk speed/capacity,
|
and network
| | speed, and might otherwise be considered too slow for
|
a user
| | workstation. For 10 users or less, this can be normal
|
Mac OS X or
| | Windows 2000 or XP Pro. You do not need to purchase
|
Mac OS X server
| | or Windows server for 10 users or less. I have seen
|
1ghz Pentium III
| | systems running Windows 2000 or PowerMac G4 500mhz
|
systems work fine
| | in this setting with sufficient RAM, disk, and
|
networking resources.
| |
2. Plan to migrate to the 2.6.x consolidated upgrade
|
version. You
| | may need assistance to migrate data from your old
|
files to the
| | intermediate format in 2.6. Once you are in 2.6, our
|
aim is to make
| | upgrades possible by replacing only the interface
|
file, and gives us
| | the flexibility of "locking-down" parts of
|
the system by using a
| | special tailored interface file to disable access
|
completely to
| | certain classes of users. Version 2.6 will require
|
FileMaker 9 or
| | later, except for single-user runtime-only
|
installations.
| |
3. For those installations using v2.6 or later we plan
|
to have an
| | automated process available to move the data to the
|
new version 3
| | once that becomes available. The data structures are
|
going to be
| | completely different.
FileMaker Licensing Issues:
Packaged bundles with FileMaker Server (not Server
|
Advanced, which
| | has web built-in) and 5, 10 or more client licenses
|
and 1 year of
| | maintenance (free updates) are available through
|
FileMaker directly.
| | Mention you are a CottageMed user for special discount
|
pricing, non-
| | profits also get special additional pricing, but may
|
need to supply
| | qualifying documentation. This is not completely in
|
place yet, as we
| | are still working to get the word through the FMI
|
sales group, but
| | should be in place before Jan 2008. We will post a
|
list of FMI
| | direct sales contacts by your Region with phone
|
numbers once they
| | become available. FMI direct pricing is usually going
|
to be more
| | affordable than retail, especially when packages of 5
|
licenses or
| | more are involved. A rough guide is that 10 client
|
licenses will pay
| | for a copy of FM Server. Make sure to budget for and
|
ask the sales
| | rep about annual maintenance, so you get free
|
upgrades, otherwise
| | you risk deferring your upgrade expense until the next
|
version
| | purchase. Only FMI direct sales or dealers can sell
|
FileMaker with
| | maintenance, retail does not. We may end up being able
|
to resell
| | FileMaker licenses to CottageMed users at this special
|
price.
| |
Regards,
Theo Gantos
On Dec 9, 2007, at 7:51 PM, Malcolm Sickels wrote:
| | All I use CM for is notes and billing (we print
|
|
out superbills that
| | | | go to the billing company): I'm the only doc
|
|
(and do all the IT
| | | | myself), but the staff put in notes (3 other
|
|
computers), too, and
| | | | there's only one office. My computer runs the
|
|
database and
| | | | everyone else connects to it (so no FM Server).
|
|
All supplement
| | | | sales are handled with MYOB. Filing (labs etc) is
|
|
done outside of
| | | | FMP into regular folders on a shared drive.
If I upgraded, I'd get FMP9, but would it be
|
|
better to wait, and
| | | | how long will it be before CM 3.0 is ready (and
|
|
might FMP 9.5 or 10
| | | | be out by then) and what will change with it?
Malcolm
On Dec 9, 2007, at 6:58 PM, Theo Gantos wrote:
| | Dr. Sickels-
It would be hard to say. Can you tell us a bit
|
|
|
more about your
| | | | | | environment please?
Number of computers, number of users, number
|
|
|
of office locations,
| | | | | | number of practitioners with NPI #'s, who
|
|
|
manages the system, do
| | | | | | you run FM server, what type of practice, how
|
|
|
do you integrate
| | | | | | with billing or any other applications. Do
|
|
|
you sell anything like
| | | | | | vitamins, etc?
Please be a specific as possible.
My gut reaction is to say that in general one
|
|
|
conversion project
| | | | | | is easier than two but it depends.
Theo
On Dec 9, 2007, at 5:16 PM, Malcolm Sickels
|
|
|
wrote:
| | | | | |
>Now that most of my Macs are Intels,
|
|
|
I'm considering moving up to
| | | | | | >a native FMP. Is it worth waiting for CM
|
|
|
3.0 or should I go with
| | | | | | >the current CM 2.5.something? I'm
|
|
|
still on 1.9.1 with FMP 6.
| | | | | | >It's always a pain to upgrade CM as I
|
|
|
forget all the tweaks I
| | | | | | >made to it (like not having it clear the
|
|
|
billing note field when
| | | | | | >clicking Superbill from the notes page)
|
|
|
and have to go redo them
| | | | | | >as I notice them. I'd rather not do
|
|
|
it any more then I have to.
| | | | | | >
Dr. Malcolm Sickels MD
210 Little Lake Drive, Suite 10
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
http://drsickels.com
734-332-9936
|
|
|
|
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
|
|
|
|
 |
|
