Please submit any feature requests and vote on ideas that have already been submitted to indicate your interest in seeing them developed
Marko and Das had conversation with Alberto on this topic. Details need to be attached.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eKENvzteHcEOd3Mw7xg5oKplH7zgV5Vde2ma9FZJb2U/edit
@Marko Stevovic @Anastasis Poulloura Please add details from your previous conversation with Alberto to describe more specific scenarios, or terminology inconsistency examples. (Details of the why)
Guest
|
Idea detail description
nM is near real time monitoring of workflow/lab efficiency nA is retrospective analysis of workflow/lab efficiency They are two faces of the same custome need, nM allows proactive and "near real time" action on potential issues, nA allows me to understand the "as is" and monitor the effectiveness of any change made and enable constant continous improvement and overall quality. The configuration and termonologies used by the two products should be consistent for the user |
I’m availbale to be contacted in case you need further info.
Alberto
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1boA3hM4DvpMTLylNRBXHfuwEZvFvuoM4G7Lt3nRpLsg/edit here there are a couple of screenshot with different terminologies in TAT start/stop event between Analytics and nMon. Further more both nMon and nAC can set the instrument throughput independently and the two systems are handled by multiple teams. It would be nice, for consistency, to be able to configure these values from the source system (i.e. infinity gateway) instead of on each rwceiving syatems