Why would the iPad need Flash for imaging? X-rays, CT, MRI, images are static and do not need flash.
Actually Flash does work really well for 3D X-ray imaging. I have written a Flash application just for this purpose. You need some sort of interactive component to view 3D images which are all the rage in radiology these days. Anyway, you could also do it with a dedicated App as well but until recently Flash was the most ubiquitous way to share 3D radiology data with others across the Internet. And with Flash there is no zoom limitation.
I agree, but being able to get it going without having to write proprietary software is extremely useful, since it will help iPad get to the critical mass needed to make it worth software companies while to develop the native apps.
Yes, perhaps I should have said, "A good and possibly necessary first step." Although, I don't think it's going to be long before the demand is there for proprietary software.
What about wiping down the device when it's traveling between patients? Most hospitals are meticulous about this, but I'm sure new procedures will need to be established. I wonder if Apple could coat the device with an anti-bacterial surface treatment?
Most hospitals are using wireless applications on private networks right now. It's just a private wireless network at our hospital.
Are wireless devices approved for surgery suites? I would think not due to potential hazards with flammable anesthesia gases and electromagnetic interference.
Back when I worked in surgery, we had no such devices. Just curious.
A good first step, but I imagine it won't be long before they realize that the costs of writing "proprietary software" are outweighed by the advantages. I think the iPad is going to be huge in health care.
I am not sure what you mean by this: "the costs of writing "proprietary software" in relation to the Citrix ecosystem. As far as I know, Citrix (and many other companies, e.g., IBM and all those makers of complex biomedical instruments for MRI, X-ray, CAT scans, etc.) have already written the appropriate softwares for these devices. Some are native to the Mac OS, but many are proprietary but existing programs usually stored in very powerful server computers also used as storage devices for the data collected.
In the past, desktop computers (both Macs and PCs) have been used to access the information. For much "simpler biomedical information" that are already existing in many digital age hospitals and doctor's offices, Citrix has developed a Citrix-iPhone exosytem to make the access to the biomedical information more portable. Citrix is now trying to capitalize on its existing proprietary software to extend its experience in the iPhone to be used in the iPad -- a better portable device for viewing biomedical information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by habermas
OMFG! It's an intermediary layer that ultimately produces sub-standard applications for the platform! Where is Steve Jobs when we need him? This application SHOULD BE BANNED immediately!
If you have been in an actual biomedical setting or in reseearch in any science and technology field, both Macs and PCs are used to connect to servers. What Citrix has done was to show that iPhones and now iPads can be used as terminals to view information that are stored in a Linux or MS-centric server. It is because of such efforts by companies, like Citrix, that the iPhone and potentially the iPad can gain a toehold in fields where many of the softwares are written in MS-centric or other proprietary softwares,
I am sure that other companies, e.g., IBM, General Electric, etc., which are also big in manufacturing of biomedical instruments or into softwares developedd for the biomedical field have similar plans for porting their servers to the iPhone, iPod Touch or the iPad.
There are however some other companies now that are creating OS X (via server) and iPhone OS centric softwares to port to the iPhone OS mobile devices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen
If the imaging application runs on windows it can be delivered to the ipad using citrix if the hospital deploys or has deployed a citrix solution. All the processing occurs on the server side. The citrix receiver application is a thin client it connects to the server and allows for interaction with the application. The actual back end processing doesn't need to change.
Indeed, as I explained in my edit of my first post in this thread. What I stated in the one you quoted (also noted by Ajit and others) is that there is no need to convert the original data to Flash.
Why would the iPad need Flash for imaging? X-rays, CT, MRI, images are static and do not need flash. Only cardiac echo, US are moving images and that can be done with MPEG or HTML5. Telemetry would be best done via real data transmission... and they are doing this with the iPhone already. Don't need Adobe... they are irrelevant in mobile.
A good first step, but I imagine it won't be long before they realize that the costs of writing "proprietary software" are outweighed by the advantages. I think the iPad is going to be huge in health care.
Gotta remember one thing... When it comes to anything involving a patients life, hospitals are VERY slow to act. It's the total opposite of the financial sector (stock brokers) where SPEED is paramount and MONEY is of little concern.
Lets put it another way...
Would YOU take the responsibility of replacing one already established system (no matter how old it is) and putting in a new one? I'll answer that for ya.. it would have to be an ENORMOUS improvement to even consider messing with an established system AND if it was given the green light by one or MORE hospital committees (each with their own agenda) THEN you would have to test the &#*%& out of it for a VERY long time... while devising training programs and implementation procedures and finally a disaster recovery plan just incase something unexpected cropped up.
Does I sound like I've had some past experience with this?
Anyway... replacing a working 'technology' in a hospital is about the toughest thing to do. Right up their with Nuclear Power Plant systems and Air Traffic Control systems. Clearly not for the 'maverick with a great idea' that might otherwise be a GREAT thing to have.
All this being said, I'm QUITE impressed that the hospital is embracing this technology as quickly as they are... Sure you might say 'well they are simply using it as a VNC/Citrix client' but like I say... introducing any new systems directly related to patient care is a MAMMOTH responsibility and equally mammoth undertaking. Even when it's simply introducing new computers. Everything is a BIG deal.
Are wireless devices approved for surgery suites? I would think not due to potential hazards with flammable anesthesia gases and electromagnetic interference.
Back when I worked in surgery, we had no such devices. Just curious.
I have no idea. I'm in IT but I don't do desktop support and I haven't gone out to any of our surgery suites.
If you have been in an actual biomedical setting or in reseearch in any science and technology field, both Macs and PCs are used to connect to servers. What Citrix has done was to show that iPhones and now iPads can be used as terminals to view information that are stored in a Linux or MS-centric server. It is because of such efforts by companies, like Citrix, that the iPhone and potentially the iPad can gain a toehold in fields where many of the softwares are written in MS-centric or other proprietary softwares,
I know and I agree completely. I was just making a sarcastic reference to all the idiot fanboys in here who think that Steve Jobs is doing them a favour by banning developers' use of intermediary layers to abstract their code away from the native APIs - and to Steve Jobs' own snowblinded rhetoric about how using these cross platform layers ultimately hurts the users.
The windows applications are delivered to the ipad from the Citrix Server. They'll be able to use Flash applications without issue on the ipad using Citrix Receiver. This application just works if you have the Citrix infrastructure, which many hospitals do.
I had our hospitals citrix applications running in less than 5 minutes on my ipad.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
Actually Flash does work really well for 3D X-ray imaging. I have written a Flash application just for this purpose. You need some sort of interactive component to view 3D images which are all the rage in radiology these days. Anyway, you could also do it with a dedicated App as well but until recently Flash was the most ubiquitous way to share 3D radiology data with others across the Internet. And with Flash there is no zoom limitation.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
While I might be mistaken, Citrix boiled down to a simple concept is a proprietary form of VNC with some additional benefits that VNC doesn't (usually?) provide for I'd be quite surprised if the client or server was actually written in/with FLASH. It's likely written in some derivative of C I'd imagine. With custom UI code for each platform the client supports, OS X, iPhone, iPad, Windows, Unix, etc... Not sure exactly what clients Citrix supports but my guess is quite a few.
* Yes Citrix may well be tremendously different than VNC but the basic idea is what I'm trying to get across... You are opening a A/V window + keyboard & mouse control to a different machine running any number of different Applications that may or may not even be available on the client machines OS.
So Citrix WILL allow one to run a flashed based application from an iPad or any other device that Citrix has a client for, as will a VNC client or any other 3rd party screen sharing client/server. What Citrix is doing is simply 'opening a video & controller portal' to a windows based (virtual?) machine and/or session that has the software you are looking to run already installed and running.
So with that in mind all the flash people crying over FLASH not being viewable on an iPad or iPhone could actually work around Apple and launch a VNC client on the iPad and have a VNC server running on your desktop/laptop computer (mac or windows) and launch a browser that does have the flash plugin. Like Safari or Firefox, etc etc. Provided you have reasonably good WIFI bandwidth you'll be just fine.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
I'm a big fan of your posts about this topic so far. I haven't read anything you've written here on his topic that I disagree with.
Citrix can deliver the whole windows 7 desktop or just a browser which has a flash plugin installed. I posted a link above of citrix receiver in use executing windows applications.
Citrix doesn't use flash it just delivers windows applications.
Our imaging applications don't use flash, nor do any of our web applications. My intent wasn't to corroborate the use of flash for images. My intent is to state that if someone wrote a web application which utilized flash it could run through a browser with a flash plugin installed via citrix receiver.
While I might be mistaken, Citrix is a proprietary form of VNC with some additional benefits that VNC doesn't (usually?) provide for I'd be quite surprised if the client or server was actually written in/with FLASH. It's likely written in some derivative of C I'd imagine. With custom UI code for each platform the client supports, OS X, iPhone, iPad, Windows, Unix, etc... Not sure exactly what clients Citrix supports but my guess is quite a few.
So Citrix WILL allow one to run a flashed based application from an iPad or any other device that Citrix has a client for, as will a VNC client or any other 3rd party screen sharing client/server. What Citrix is doing is simply 'opening a video & controller portal' to a windows based (virtual?) machine and/or session that has the software you are looking to run already installed and running.
So with that in mind all the flash people crying over FLASH not being viewable on an iPad or iPhone could actually work around Apple and launch a VNC client on the iPad and have a VNC server running on your desktop/laptop computer (mac or windows) and launch a browser that does have the flash plugin. Like Safari or Firefox, etc etc.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
I can't speak for others but our system works as follows. BMP (or TIF) slice images are exported by the TWAIN acquiring source application and exported to a directory on the server. My Flash application downloads the source images dynamically so they are not stored inside the Flash application. The Flash app is around 200K and can view any case on the server given that you have the proper permissions. This allows doctors around the globe the ability to consult on a case very easily without having to install any proprietary software.
There are of course export features within the dedicated acquisition software to export as an EXE file but in that case it also needs to store a copy of the image files which runs the size up to 400+ MB which then needs to be transfered by FTP. The EXE executable is also only compatible with Windows. So my Flash solution has proven to be quite a time saver as well as very convenient.
Gotta remember one thing... When it comes to anything involving a patients life, hospitals are VERY slow to act. It's the total opposite of the financial sector (stock brokers) where SPEED is paramount and MONEY is of little concern.
Lets put it another way...
Would YOU take the responsibility of replacing one already established system (no matter how old it is) and putting in a new one? I'll answer that for ya.. it would have to be an ENORMOUS improvement to even consider messing with an established system AND if it was given the green light by one or MORE hospital committees (each with their own agenda) THEN you would have to test the &#*%& out of it for a VERY long time... while devising training programs and implementation procedures and finally a disaster recovery plan just incase something unexpected cropped up.
Does I sound like I've had some past experience with this?
Anyway... replacing a working 'technology' in a hospital is about the toughest thing to do. Right up their with Nuclear Power Plant systems and Air Traffic Control systems. Clearly not for the 'maverick with a great idea' that might otherwise be a GREAT thing to have.
All this being said, I'm QUITE impressed that the hospital is embracing this technology as quickly as they are... Sure you might say 'well they are simply using it as a VNC/Citrix client' but like I say... introducing any new systems directly related to patient care is a MAMMOTH responsibility and equally mammoth undertaking. Even when it's simply introducing new computers. Everything is a BIG deal.
That's a very good point, I'd not thought of that.
Back in the day I wrote software in the aerospace industry (for cockpit displays and controls) and it was similar there - unless it absolutely definitely needed changing, it didn't get changed.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
You do realize that there is already a Citrix app for the iPad? Check it out in the App Store.
Comments
Why would the iPad need Flash for imaging? X-rays, CT, MRI, images are static and do not need flash.
Actually Flash does work really well for 3D X-ray imaging. I have written a Flash application just for this purpose. You need some sort of interactive component to view 3D images which are all the rage in radiology these days. Anyway, you could also do it with a dedicated App as well but until recently Flash was the most ubiquitous way to share 3D radiology data with others across the Internet. And with Flash there is no zoom limitation.
So you can learn something useful here after all!
Hey hey hey... lets not get too far ahead of ourselves... Even a broken clock is right once a day*!!
* Twice a day if its a non-military analog clock...
I agree, but being able to get it going without having to write proprietary software is extremely useful, since it will help iPad get to the critical mass needed to make it worth software companies while to develop the native apps.
Yes, perhaps I should have said, "A good and possibly necessary first step." Although, I don't think it's going to be long before the demand is there for proprietary software.
Most hospitals are using wireless applications on private networks right now. It's just a private wireless network at our hospital.
Are wireless devices approved for surgery suites? I would think not due to potential hazards with flammable anesthesia gases and electromagnetic interference.
Back when I worked in surgery, we had no such devices. Just curious.
A good first step, but I imagine it won't be long before they realize that the costs of writing "proprietary software" are outweighed by the advantages. I think the iPad is going to be huge in health care.
I am not sure what you mean by this: "the costs of writing "proprietary software" in relation to the Citrix ecosystem. As far as I know, Citrix (and many other companies, e.g., IBM and all those makers of complex biomedical instruments for MRI, X-ray, CAT scans, etc.) have already written the appropriate softwares for these devices. Some are native to the Mac OS, but many are proprietary but existing programs usually stored in very powerful server computers also used as storage devices for the data collected.
In the past, desktop computers (both Macs and PCs) have been used to access the information. For much "simpler biomedical information" that are already existing in many digital age hospitals and doctor's offices, Citrix has developed a Citrix-iPhone exosytem to make the access to the biomedical information more portable. Citrix is now trying to capitalize on its existing proprietary software to extend its experience in the iPhone to be used in the iPad -- a better portable device for viewing biomedical information.
OMFG! It's an intermediary layer that ultimately produces sub-standard applications for the platform! Where is Steve Jobs when we need him? This application SHOULD BE BANNED immediately!
If you have been in an actual biomedical setting or in reseearch in any science and technology field, both Macs and PCs are used to connect to servers. What Citrix has done was to show that iPhones and now iPads can be used as terminals to view information that are stored in a Linux or MS-centric server. It is because of such efforts by companies, like Citrix, that the iPhone and potentially the iPad can gain a toehold in fields where many of the softwares are written in MS-centric or other proprietary softwares,
I am sure that other companies, e.g., IBM, General Electric, etc., which are also big in manufacturing of biomedical instruments or into softwares developedd for the biomedical field have similar plans for porting their servers to the iPhone, iPod Touch or the iPad.
There are however some other companies now that are creating OS X (via server) and iPhone OS centric softwares to port to the iPhone OS mobile devices.
If the imaging application runs on windows it can be delivered to the ipad using citrix if the hospital deploys or has deployed a citrix solution. All the processing occurs on the server side. The citrix receiver application is a thin client it connects to the server and allows for interaction with the application. The actual back end processing doesn't need to change.
Indeed, as I explained in my edit of my first post in this thread. What I stated in the one you quoted (also noted by Ajit and others) is that there is no need to convert the original data to Flash.
CGC
Why would the iPad need Flash for imaging? X-rays, CT, MRI, images are static and do not need flash. Only cardiac echo, US are moving images and that can be done with MPEG or HTML5. Telemetry would be best done via real data transmission... and they are doing this with the iPhone already. Don't need Adobe... they are irrelevant in mobile.
A good first step, but I imagine it won't be long before they realize that the costs of writing "proprietary software" are outweighed by the advantages. I think the iPad is going to be huge in health care.
Gotta remember one thing... When it comes to anything involving a patients life, hospitals are VERY slow to act. It's the total opposite of the financial sector (stock brokers) where SPEED is paramount and MONEY is of little concern.
Lets put it another way...
Would YOU take the responsibility of replacing one already established system (no matter how old it is) and putting in a new one? I'll answer that for ya.. it would have to be an ENORMOUS improvement to even consider messing with an established system AND if it was given the green light by one or MORE hospital committees (each with their own agenda) THEN you would have to test the &#*%& out of it for a VERY long time... while devising training programs and implementation procedures and finally a disaster recovery plan just incase something unexpected cropped up.
Does I sound like I've had some past experience with this?
Anyway... replacing a working 'technology' in a hospital is about the toughest thing to do. Right up their with Nuclear Power Plant systems and Air Traffic Control systems. Clearly not for the 'maverick with a great idea' that might otherwise be a GREAT thing to have.
All this being said, I'm QUITE impressed that the hospital is embracing this technology as quickly as they are... Sure you might say 'well they are simply using it as a VNC/Citrix client' but like I say... introducing any new systems directly related to patient care is a MAMMOTH responsibility and equally mammoth undertaking. Even when it's simply introducing new computers. Everything is a BIG deal.
Are wireless devices approved for surgery suites? I would think not due to potential hazards with flammable anesthesia gases and electromagnetic interference.
Back when I worked in surgery, we had no such devices. Just curious.
I have no idea. I'm in IT but I don't do desktop support and I haven't gone out to any of our surgery suites.
If you have been in an actual biomedical setting or in reseearch in any science and technology field, both Macs and PCs are used to connect to servers. What Citrix has done was to show that iPhones and now iPads can be used as terminals to view information that are stored in a Linux or MS-centric server. It is because of such efforts by companies, like Citrix, that the iPhone and potentially the iPad can gain a toehold in fields where many of the softwares are written in MS-centric or other proprietary softwares,
I know and I agree completely. I was just making a sarcastic reference to all the idiot fanboys in here who think that Steve Jobs is doing them a favour by banning developers' use of intermediary layers to abstract their code away from the native APIs - and to Steve Jobs' own snowblinded rhetoric about how using these cross platform layers ultimately hurts the users.
I thought Dr's had a sense of humor...
Doctors not so much (depending on the specialization)
MD / Ph.D ... a little
Ph.D ... a lot more fun!
A Ph.D who had a lab where I worked was having a party... The sign on the elevator bulletin board read...
Quote:
Please come help celebrate Joe's 29th anniversary of his 21st birthday!!
Pizza booze, beer and wine will be hot/cold and plentiful.
The hospital will be delivering the applications using Citrix Receiver.
http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/pr...tentID=1864392
The windows applications are delivered to the ipad from the Citrix Server. They'll be able to use Flash applications without issue on the ipad using Citrix Receiver. This application just works if you have the Citrix infrastructure, which many hospitals do.
I had our hospitals citrix applications running in less than 5 minutes on my ipad.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
Actually Flash does work really well for 3D X-ray imaging. I have written a Flash application just for this purpose. You need some sort of interactive component to view 3D images which are all the rage in radiology these days. Anyway, you could also do it with a dedicated App as well but until recently Flash was the most ubiquitous way to share 3D radiology data with others across the Internet. And with Flash there is no zoom limitation.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
Yes, the ipad works when you have latex gloves on. We tested it during our demo at my hospital.
Thats good. I was thinking about that myself. Gloves must be thin enough.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
While I might be mistaken, Citrix boiled down to a simple concept is a proprietary form of VNC with some additional benefits that VNC doesn't (usually?) provide for I'd be quite surprised if the client or server was actually written in/with FLASH. It's likely written in some derivative of C I'd imagine. With custom UI code for each platform the client supports, OS X, iPhone, iPad, Windows, Unix, etc... Not sure exactly what clients Citrix supports but my guess is quite a few.
* Yes Citrix may well be tremendously different than VNC but the basic idea is what I'm trying to get across... You are opening a A/V window + keyboard & mouse control to a different machine running any number of different Applications that may or may not even be available on the client machines OS.
So Citrix WILL allow one to run a flashed based application from an iPad or any other device that Citrix has a client for, as will a VNC client or any other 3rd party screen sharing client/server. What Citrix is doing is simply 'opening a video & controller portal' to a windows based (virtual?) machine and/or session that has the software you are looking to run already installed and running.
So with that in mind all the flash people crying over FLASH not being viewable on an iPad or iPhone could actually work around Apple and launch a VNC client on the iPad and have a VNC server running on your desktop/laptop computer (mac or windows) and launch a browser that does have the flash plugin. Like Safari or Firefox, etc etc. Provided you have reasonably good WIFI bandwidth you'll be just fine.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
I'm a big fan of your posts about this topic so far. I haven't read anything you've written here on his topic that I disagree with.
Citrix can deliver the whole windows 7 desktop or just a browser which has a flash plugin installed. I posted a link above of citrix receiver in use executing windows applications.
Citrix doesn't use flash it just delivers windows applications.
Our imaging applications don't use flash, nor do any of our web applications. My intent wasn't to corroborate the use of flash for images. My intent is to state that if someone wrote a web application which utilized flash it could run through a browser with a flash plugin installed via citrix receiver.
While I might be mistaken, Citrix is a proprietary form of VNC with some additional benefits that VNC doesn't (usually?) provide for I'd be quite surprised if the client or server was actually written in/with FLASH. It's likely written in some derivative of C I'd imagine. With custom UI code for each platform the client supports, OS X, iPhone, iPad, Windows, Unix, etc... Not sure exactly what clients Citrix supports but my guess is quite a few.
So Citrix WILL allow one to run a flashed based application from an iPad or any other device that Citrix has a client for, as will a VNC client or any other 3rd party screen sharing client/server. What Citrix is doing is simply 'opening a video & controller portal' to a windows based (virtual?) machine and/or session that has the software you are looking to run already installed and running.
So with that in mind all the flash people crying over FLASH not being viewable on an iPad or iPhone could actually work around Apple and launch a VNC client on the iPad and have a VNC server running on your desktop/laptop computer (mac or windows) and launch a browser that does have the flash plugin. Like Safari or Firefox, etc etc.
Well stated.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
I can't speak for others but our system works as follows. BMP (or TIF) slice images are exported by the TWAIN acquiring source application and exported to a directory on the server. My Flash application downloads the source images dynamically so they are not stored inside the Flash application. The Flash app is around 200K and can view any case on the server given that you have the proper permissions. This allows doctors around the globe the ability to consult on a case very easily without having to install any proprietary software.
There are of course export features within the dedicated acquisition software to export as an EXE file but in that case it also needs to store a copy of the image files which runs the size up to 400+ MB which then needs to be transfered by FTP. The EXE executable is also only compatible with Windows. So my Flash solution has proven to be quite a time saver as well as very convenient.
Gotta remember one thing... When it comes to anything involving a patients life, hospitals are VERY slow to act. It's the total opposite of the financial sector (stock brokers) where SPEED is paramount and MONEY is of little concern.
Lets put it another way...
Would YOU take the responsibility of replacing one already established system (no matter how old it is) and putting in a new one? I'll answer that for ya.. it would have to be an ENORMOUS improvement to even consider messing with an established system AND if it was given the green light by one or MORE hospital committees (each with their own agenda) THEN you would have to test the &#*%& out of it for a VERY long time... while devising training programs and implementation procedures and finally a disaster recovery plan just incase something unexpected cropped up.
Does I sound like I've had some past experience with this?
Anyway... replacing a working 'technology' in a hospital is about the toughest thing to do. Right up their with Nuclear Power Plant systems and Air Traffic Control systems. Clearly not for the 'maverick with a great idea' that might otherwise be a GREAT thing to have.
All this being said, I'm QUITE impressed that the hospital is embracing this technology as quickly as they are... Sure you might say 'well they are simply using it as a VNC/Citrix client' but like I say... introducing any new systems directly related to patient care is a MAMMOTH responsibility and equally mammoth undertaking. Even when it's simply introducing new computers. Everything is a BIG deal.
That's a very good point, I'd not thought of that.
Back in the day I wrote software in the aerospace industry (for cockpit displays and controls) and it was similar there - unless it absolutely definitely needed changing, it didn't get changed.
I am not sure exactly what imaging technology Citrix uses, whether they use Flash. Can you please specify a link from Citrix to verify that they do use Flash?
Even if Citrix uses Flash, is there any indication that the original images attached to the servers used by machines like MRI store their original images using Flash technology? If not, there is "loss in resolution" whenever any data is transferred from one technology to another.
It may be feasible but is it always practical? Some of the more advances biomedical research instruments today use very powerful computers not only to store but to analyze the data. As noted above, if the original data is not stored and viewed as Flash information, it will be impractical to convert them to Flash prior to analysis. As important, the data storage and cost would be enormous if the original data is further stored as secondary information, in the form of Flash -- unless Flash images can be a metadata.
CGC
You do realize that there is already a Citrix app for the iPad? Check it out in the App Store.