Today’s contender is eHealthOpinion.
First the site is a sight for people with good eye site. Really, they’ve managed to cram 386 words into the first page. Now I’m not sure what the standard word count should be on a page but if you compare it to Google’s Health of just under 100 words one starts to wonder (o.k. enough of the homophones).
After wading through what seemed like unfathomable depths of information on the front page (thank Posideon they don’t know about scrolling) I found this wonderful pearl (o.k. enough of the sea metaphors).
www.ehealthopinion.com is a classic Web 2.0 application. Via eHealthopinion we provide an innovative way to connect patients with doctors as well as referring doctors with their expert counterparts.
Now when I think of classic I don’t think of innovative. Perhaps classic has to be innovative in the day but when in the hell did Web 2.0 become classic. Last I checked Wikipedia something had to wait at least twenty years to become classic. If Web 2.0 is classic does that make Web 1.0 archaic?
Anyway eHealthOpinion claims to connect people with Doctors (I guess Doctors are not people). So I decided to sign up and was greeted with the normal Homeldand Security third degree questionairre…answer, scroll, answer, scoll blah blah. I’m almost done with the tedious form for sign up and was wondering why they don’t consider OpenID a part of ‘classic’ Web 2.0 when the sign up form started asking me about my current condition. Well at this point my current condition is furstrated at the fact it is taking me 1/2 a day to fill out their sign up form.
Thus concludes your one minute Health 2.0 review: eHealthOpinion goes into the eWasteBasket.