Front End fail may have only been the visible trouble.

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Post Reply
JLawson
Posts: 424
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Front End fail may have only been the visible trouble.

Post by JLawson »

What the user sees interfacing with a web site isn't the really important part - in fact, I'd argue that it's about 10%. The user actually has to be able to get the product they're wanting, whether it's information or entertainment or to purchase something. How many times have you gone to Amazon, found just what you wanted and then found you couldn't buy it because the facility to take payments and pass your order to a vendor simply didn't work?

(I'd say you could count that on the thumb of one foot... as in 'it wouldn't happen'.)

But in the rush to 'fix' the site - something seems to have gotten lost along the way.

And something else - look at the link text... /2013/12/02/business/white-house-praises-gains-on-health-site.html vs the actual title of the piece.

Insurers Claim Health Website Is Still Flawed
Weeks of frantic technical work appear to have made the government’s health care website easier for consumers to use. But that does not mean everyone who signs up for insurance can enroll in a health plan.

The problem is that so-called back end systems, which are supposed to deliver consumer information to insurers, still have not been fixed. And with coverage for many people scheduled to begin in just 30 days, insurers are worried the repairs may not be completed in time.

Now, comparing this to someplace like EHealthInsurance.Com may not be fair. I didn't have to go through the IRS to verify my existence and income, and I didn't have to wait days or months to actually get onto the site. I didn't have to give them anything other than a name and a telephone number, and I didn't have to let the government choose for me what sort of plan I could look at or what companies I could buy from.

And when I put in my phone and expressed interest in a couple of plans, inside of an hour I had three callbacks looking to provide my insurance needs. It's almost like they WANTED to provide a good experience.

In fact, it was almost like it was set up to be EASY, simple, and safe to use. Obviously consumer grade stuff - hardly worth mentioning.

Obviously, the Obamacare experience is MUCH better from a governmental standpoint. :lol: :P :lol:

Site doesn't work, nebulous promises to provide 'care', providing your application doesn't get lost in the gaping holes (if you can even put it in in the first place) between the government and the providers.

Well... they only had three years. Why, it took them 18 months to build the Pentagon, and that was MUCH less complex than a retail insurance web site! /sarc
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Re: Front End fail may have only been the visible trouble.

Post by hanelyp »

Another point: If the information you provide direct to a commercial insurance business gets in the hands of an identity thief, they're going to have some 'splainin' to do. I have no expectation that those who produced the gooberment health "insurance" takeover site would be similarly held to account.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.

paperburn1
Posts: 2484
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Front End fail may have only been the visible trouble.

Post by paperburn1 »

Thats all ready happing on a large scale.....but the news stopped reporting it.
http://nation.time.com/2013/11/14/the-l ... -websites/
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

Post Reply