EXHIBIT NO. 16 - LETTER FROM KPMG LLP

December 4, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C.  20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We were previously principal accountants for MAI Systems Corporation (the
"Registrant") and, under the date of March 31, 2002, we reported on the
consolidated financial statements of MAI Systems Corporation as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000. On November 14, 2002, our appointment as
principal accountants was terminated. We have read MAI Systems Corporation's
statements included under Item 4 of its Form 8-K dated November 21, 2002, and we
agree with such statements except as described below:

During the Registrant's two most recent fiscal years and the subsequent interim
periods to the date of our dismissal, there were no disagreements between the
Registrant and KPMG LLP on any matters of accounting principles or practices,
financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which
disagreements(s) if not resolved to our satisfaction would have caused us to
make reference in connection with our reports to the subject matter of the
disagreements except for the following matters:

      a.    We advised management of the Registrant, based on the evidence
            provided to us through the date of our dismissal, that we did not
            concur with the Registrant's capitalization of software development
            costs during the three months ended June 30, 2002.

      b.    The Registrant filed its Form 10-Q for the three months ended June
            30, 2002 ("Form 10-Q") on August 14, 2002 and did not disclose that
            we had not completed our review of the Registrant's financial
            statements for the three months ended June 30, 2002 pursuant to
            Statement on Auditing Standards ("SAS") No. 71, Interim Financial
            Information. We informed management that if they did not amend the
            Form 10-Q promptly to disclose this fact, we would consider their
            inaction to be an illegal act. When the Registrant amended the Form
            10-Q on August 23, 2002, the Registrant stated:

                  ".... Due to the late engagement of KPMG to commence the
                  review process and KPMG's unanticipated backlog of work, the
                  Company filed its Form 10-Q in advance of KPMG's completion of
                  the SAS 71 review. KPMG anticipates completion of its review
                  shortly..."

            We believe that the Registrant should have disclosed that the
            completion of our SAS No. 71 review was pending the receipt of
            satisfactory corroborative evidence supporting the capitalization of
            software development costs recorded by the Registrant during the
            three months ended June 30, 2002.

Very truly yours,

/s/ KPMG LLP