Comments on: Microsoft’s HealthVault Beats Google To the Punch http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/04/microsofts-healthvault-beats-google-to-the-punch/ Technology News Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:25:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Ashley http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/04/microsofts-healthvault-beats-google-to-the-punch/#comment-117059 Ashley Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:49:46 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/04/microsofts-healthvault-beats-google-to-the-punch/#comment-117059 Good points there Cory. I think it's somewhere around only 20% of doctors and hospitals (don't quote me on the number) have gone to eletronic records. For this service to be extremely useful, that number will have to go up. It's the same battle Google is going to face as well once their service launches. Good points there Cory. I think it’s somewhere around only 20% of doctors and hospitals (don’t quote me on the number) have gone to eletronic records. For this service to be extremely useful, that number will have to go up. It’s the same battle Google is going to face as well once their service launches.

]]> By: CoryC http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/04/microsofts-healthvault-beats-google-to-the-punch/#comment-117043 CoryC Thu, 04 Oct 2007 19:06:07 +0000 http://cybernetnews.com/2007/10/04/microsofts-healthvault-beats-google-to-the-punch/#comment-117043 Microsoft is going to have a hard time convincing doctors and hospitals to use the service. Even though the service is free it's going to cost them money to develop application that are useful. Even if useful applications are made available for free, training and using the application will cost them money. As for privacy concerns, many people trust Microsoft with email but with complete medical history, I think that's going to be a very tough sell. I can here Microsoft now, "It's true we have a difficult time securing Windows but we'll keep your extremely personal information private - we promise." I don't see it being a success. If Microsoft want more facilities to use electronic medical records(EMR) then they need to make the software available for free. Even then, EMR would cost hospitals millions of dollars to implement (hardware, training, etc). Also, you have to remember hospitals and doctors compete against each other for your business. Making everything easily availble to patients means patients can easily choose another doctor or hospital and that's not good for business. Microsoft is going to have a hard time convincing doctors and hospitals to use the service. Even though the service is free it’s going to cost them money to develop application that are useful. Even if useful applications are made available for free, training and using the application will cost them money.

As for privacy concerns, many people trust Microsoft with email but with complete medical history, I think that’s going to be a very tough sell.

I can here Microsoft now, “It’s true we have a difficult time securing Windows but we’ll keep your extremely personal information private - we promise.”

I don’t see it being a success.

If Microsoft want more facilities to use electronic medical records(EMR) then they need to make the software available for free. Even then, EMR would cost hospitals millions of dollars to implement (hardware, training, etc).

Also, you have to remember hospitals and doctors compete against each other for your business. Making everything easily availble to patients means patients can easily choose another doctor or hospital and that’s not good for business.

]]>