Re: How about
This is a ****ing outrage that such a large amount of money will be essentially pissed into the wind because the uk gov were not rid of XP in time. In a time when we are supposed to be saving money, giving what will probably work out to be measurable in billions (by the time all the other periphery bollox has been added in). I wouldn't mind, but I'd put money on MS not paying tax on the profits from that lot!
I'm not blaming microsoft here (though to be fair they've got their clients by the short and curlies) but our incompetent overlords. And they claim they aren't paid enough.
Now, getting these chaps of XP is going to be nothing short of expensive (ignoring the XP support costs). Because, Microsoft of course are going to recommend Windows 8. Which means new hardware. Which means more cost. Then of course, none of the jeffin software will probably work on it, not to mention the ridiculous re-training to be able to use office 2013 and windows 8. To people who's full time job doesn't revolve around technology.
The only acceptable answer to sorting out this mess is
All software products that don't have to be physically connected to a PC should only be browser accessible. If you can't use it through a browser it shouldn't be allowed. This then separates your client products from your server products and maximises future choice
All software should have to work 100% with ANY two browsers (Chrome / Firefox / IE / Safari) on any platform. If it doesn't it will fail the 'refresh test'. This stops vendor lock in to software (I'm looking at you microsoft)
Office applications should be browser based - Office 365 / Google / whatever as long as it meets the browser test.
Desktops should be refreshed based on need - Old XP machines recycled with Linux for kit that is passable (anything HP/Dell etc less than 4 years old should be fine) - remember - we are only going to be running a browser if done correctly!
Windows 7 kit for everything else (minimal re-training)
And last but least - Don't just give Microsoft the cash - they are charging premium money here - If they cock it up and there is any kind of mess / data breach they are responsible for ALL costs multiplied by 3. Loss of patients records should be deemed to be £10k per patient (times 3 - 50% payable directly to each patient concerned) - Risk vs reward. (rather than just reward which looks to be the chosen model)
Christ....maybe we should just go back to paper - at least it never stopped being supported by biros.