Future versions

For users or potential users.
Post Reply
Nate
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:36 pm
Location: Kansas City, MO

Future versions

Post by Nate » Tue May 12, 2009 9:13 am

How can we tell what future modifications may be made toward the improvement of the program? I remember there use to be a future versions web page that would list projects and aspects in current development. You could see what was planned and have a relative order to it. Now that 'feature request' has been added it seems there is no way to tell what may be next on the agenda. Is there a way to analyze the feature request list to find out what may be next or has the most votes, etc?

In regards to feature request, it seems it is not being utilized well. I have voted on a number of things that both I and others have suggested. However it seems some offices maybe with more then one doctor will drop 200 of their votes on a single item. Can they not just continue to due that and have the most votes on each item thereby dictate the future of the software? Are there still fundamentals which OD is working on that are not related to the feature request page?

Do others see the same thing happening? Any ideas on how to improve the feature request? I am very happy to have my input and others input heard. I feel the idea of having the feature request allows more innovation and intelligence in the design of the program but at the same time feel the current method leaves many feeling abandoned with little meaningful vote.

fishdrzig
Posts: 433
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Future versions

Post by fishdrzig » Tue May 12, 2009 10:19 am

I have the same feeling sometimes. When I was using MOGO, I would call and they would say we will let management know about it, but it was just a way to allow us to forget about it. The feature request may be sort of the same thing. Not that I blame the management, you can't obviously grant every request, look at the list, it is extensive.
I can tell you this = when a number of us started to push for a better AutoNotes module, Jordan et al listened and responded in a very timely manner. It works much better, they made some great improvements and for that I am grateful to them. I don't know a thing about programming, how much time it takes or the level of difficulty so I will just make suggestions and hopefully some of them will be helpful an implemented. I feel pretty confident having Jordan and Nathan behind the wheel. Just my view

User avatar
jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Future versions

Post by jordansparks » Tue May 12, 2009 12:56 pm

There is no other dental software that openly posts the feature requests and lets users vote on them. One of the reasons we let everyone see the list is so that they will have some sympathy for our difficult situation of trying to please everybody at once. As more users take advantage of voting, we are seeing which features are really important versus just window dressing.

One reason why we got rid of the "future versions" page is because it was incredibly inaccurate. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's vaporware. Software companies that make promises about what might happen in the future are lying as far as I'm concerned, because the complexity of programming makes it impossible to predict how long certain features will take. I always felt bad when a customer would sign up with OD and they expected the "next" feature on the future versions page to be implemented soon. But it just doesn't work like that.

I have some plans in my head on where I want to steer things. I guess I could list a few of them here for those who are curious.
1. Move to enterprise. That's what we've been working on for the last month. It's actually our third attempt, and I think we got it right this time. It will allow multiple offices on one database over secure connections. It also solves one big security issue: database passwords stored on local computers. This supplements the current connection strategy rather than replacing it. We could also host databases for customers.
2. Electronic communication with carriers. Lots of different facets to this. EOBs, eligibility, etc. Someday, when this is perfected and when all the carriers are on board, it will eliminate one staff position in a big office. The person who is on the phone all day long calling insurance companies to verify coverage will no longer be needed.
3. Expand sheets to include patient images, in-line formatting, database population, online access, etc.
As I write this list, it becomes obvious that there are hundreds of features that we all want. I would rather be guided by the voters as to the priority of each. You may notice that #2 in my short list above has bubbled to the top of the feature request system due to voting. That's what I want to see. I do also review the hundreds of smaller requests regularly. You may notice that many of them are sheets related, so a variety of smaller requests can pull weight also. The list really does help, and I don't think any of the votes are getting lost in the noise.
Jordan Sparks, DMD
http://www.opendental.com

User avatar
drtech
Posts: 1649
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 8:44 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Future versions

Post by drtech » Tue May 12, 2009 2:12 pm

I would like to be able to see the voting page even though I can't vote on it not being on support...any chance this can happen soon?
David Fuchs
Dentist - Springfield, MO
Smile Dental http://www.887-smile.com

User avatar
B.Thomas
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 11:00 pm

Re: Future versions

Post by B.Thomas » Thu May 21, 2009 8:16 pm

Jordan,

Does #3 on your future plans mean customizable New Patient exams forms, Medical Hx, and fields that will be saved in the patient's database?

If so, yay! Paperless! :D

User avatar
jordansparks
Site Admin
Posts: 5744
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:59 pm
Location: Salem, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Future versions

Post by jordansparks » Fri May 22, 2009 4:25 pm

Yes.
Jordan Sparks, DMD
http://www.opendental.com

Post Reply