Has your hospital decided to replace anything with iPads?
We're still researching. We did a proof of concept last week demoing a large number of applications to our executives. Our executives were giddy, pinching and zooming on our windows applications using the device. We are ordering more to offer up to a select group of physicians to try out. I've personally been using it to administer our EMR application for the last week and the interface is more than functional.
Add to this the ability to "expand" images would also be very useful. I wish the magnification could be almost infinite but it seems from my testing of the iPad that Apple has placed a maximum of the degree of "zoom in". This is actually very critical when examining biomedical images to find cancerous cells for example.
CGC
Microsoft's Seadragon technology and iPhone OS app might come in handy here to create an almost infinite zoom capability from composite view down to cellular level, but would require considerable familiarity with the technology and advanced photographic techniques.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by veblen
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
You do realize that there is already a Citrix app for the iPad? Check it out in the App Store.
Indeed, I was fascinated with the original request of Citrix for ideas from its customers to explore the potential uses of the iPad. The Citrix approach is important because many of the softwares developed for the hardware technologies used in science and technology, as well as biomedicine are written in softwares not native to the Mac OS. However, a number of these companies also developed the transition softwares so that Mac computers can communicate with the server computers of these hardware technologies. [There was a time actually when Mac computers dominated biomedical research laboratories. In fact, there are still many departments that would prefer Mac computers.]
Portability
The Citrix solution therefore is a way to avail of all these softwares already used for decades in hospitals and biomedical research institutions, but this time using iPhones and iPads as more portable "thin clients", instead of the previous use of "desktop" Macs and PCs, prior to the more widespread use of mobile computing devices.
Flash?
I was questioning also the role of Flash in the Citrix-(Apple mobile computing devices) ecosystem because the original applications as Citrix designed them are in the server not in the mobile computing devices. This may turn out not to be optimal way but the transitory advantage of ecosystems like this is that it allows the utilization of existing mostly PC-centric softwares already in use in the biomedical field.
In due time, if the vertical integration being envisioned by Apple does gain some traction, it may be possible that applications native to the OS X and iPhone OS may be developed to optimize server-Apple mobile computing devices) ecosystem. This may take time though, as anonymouse indicated:
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse
Just simply that software specifically adapted to the strengths and weaknesses of the the iPad will allow more efficient, effective delivery and use of information. That this will require development effort above and beyond using Citrix to hook them up to existing software, and that it will be worth it in the long run because, as great as this might seem now, the software they are running remotely obviously was not designed for an iPad, and, although very useful, it's almost certainly not the optimal way to use an iPad for this purpose.
I'm waiting... For posts about how hospitals should use Flash for x-rays and diagnostic charts...and how the iPad is clearly a sub-standard mobile touch screen pad because it lacks the ability to run Flash for Medical Emergencies - which Adobe will provide export for from Flash CS19 - due sometime in 2025.
People, people, people.
Mark was JOKING!!! Re-read what he said above in light of the Adobe/Apple/Flash history and current news on this.
Cross platform means lowest common denominator output. How many write once run everywhere java programs have you seen that were worth a darn? Maybe you shouldn't be calling people idiots when you are the one who is wrong.
If you had even bothered to read the original story you would have realised that people using VNC on an iPad to access their legacy applications is a clear example of the USER choosing to trade off cutting edge API utilisation in favor of being able to access already developed functionality in an improved form factor.
Clearly this usage scenario is valuable enough to justify the purchase of 100 iPads in one hospital alone and possibly further millions in other hospitals and educational institutions throughout the world.
Surely, once the users and it-professionals get acquainted with the new platform a desire will arise to develop iPad-native applications/interfaces to back end applications because of the improved look and feel but if these people had not had the easy access to a legacy base of applications they would have never bothered to try out the iPad in the first place.
One can imagine a tonne of similar scenarios where enterprises might want an easy port of legacy applications to the iPad using intermediary compatibility layers and once having established that the form factor works, is durable and satisfies the users they might well decide to invest in developing native applications.
This is freedom of choice and it enables a much broader range of options for consumers. This is what Steve Jobs has decided to take away from the platform. If we were to follow his braindead 'I-know-better-than-you' reasoning to its fullest and most consistent consequence then technologies such as VNC should be banned from the platform as much as other intermediary layers that ultimately 'lead to a sub-par experience for the user.'
I can see it as perfect for any place where you see 'officials' carrying any kind of clip board or where some kind of hand-held assistant may be utilized. Hotels, restaurants and hospitality management, building site management and architects, warehousing inventory, tour guide-ing and art galleries... Nothing like the scope of the general medical field but nonetheless.
For "officials", we would need a specialized model with a resistive touchscreen, which are much more precise when it comes to writing with a stylus.
I work for a company that manages 300+ hospitals. We have been testing and starting to deploy iPads with our applications somewhat aggressively.
There have been a number of surveys that showed Doctors want to use these devices. 3/5 Docs said they want to do their work on the iPad.
We also use Citrix technology and 1 or 2 of these apps use flash technology. Since flash is running in the datacenter and being delivered to our devices; iPads and iPhones, the applications work great. We are taking time (1 hour) to publish a couple of Apps in the form factor of the iPad. They look and work great too. The speed of the device and Apps, is just amazing.
A suggestion to purchase more than 1-2 iPads at a time, is to talk with your Apple Account Executive. Although they don't get credit for the sale, they can help you get more devices.
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.
....It was a yoke. (joke for the literal among us)
Comments
Yes, the ipad works when you have latex gloves on. We tested it during our demo at my hospital.
Has your hospital decided to replace anything with iPads?
Here is a link to the video of the TV news referenced which shows the iPad in action:
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?se...ogy&id=7371667
Also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdao4iPYczc
great links!
Has your hospital decided to replace anything with iPads?
We're still researching. We did a proof of concept last week demoing a large number of applications to our executives. Our executives were giddy, pinching and zooming on our windows applications using the device. We are ordering more to offer up to a select group of physicians to try out. I've personally been using it to administer our EMR application for the last week and the interface is more than functional.
Add to this the ability to "expand" images would also be very useful. I wish the magnification could be almost infinite but it seems from my testing of the iPad that Apple has placed a maximum of the degree of "zoom in". This is actually very critical when examining biomedical images to find cancerous cells for example.
CGC
Microsoft's Seadragon technology and iPhone OS app might come in handy here to create an almost infinite zoom capability from composite view down to cellular level, but would require considerable familiarity with the technology and advanced photographic techniques.
There may be an app for that...
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'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.
You do realize that there is already a Citrix app for the iPad? Check it out in the App Store.
Indeed, I was fascinated with the original request of Citrix for ideas from its customers to explore the potential uses of the iPad. The Citrix approach is important because many of the softwares developed for the hardware technologies used in science and technology, as well as biomedicine are written in softwares not native to the Mac OS. However, a number of these companies also developed the transition softwares so that Mac computers can communicate with the server computers of these hardware technologies. [There was a time actually when Mac computers dominated biomedical research laboratories. In fact, there are still many departments that would prefer Mac computers.]
Portability
The Citrix solution therefore is a way to avail of all these softwares already used for decades in hospitals and biomedical research institutions, but this time using iPhones and iPads as more portable "thin clients", instead of the previous use of "desktop" Macs and PCs, prior to the more widespread use of mobile computing devices.
Flash?
I was questioning also the role of Flash in the Citrix-(Apple mobile computing devices) ecosystem because the original applications as Citrix designed them are in the server not in the mobile computing devices. This may turn out not to be optimal way but the transitory advantage of ecosystems like this is that it allows the utilization of existing mostly PC-centric softwares already in use in the biomedical field.
In due time, if the vertical integration being envisioned by Apple does gain some traction, it may be possible that applications native to the OS X and iPhone OS may be developed to optimize server-Apple mobile computing devices) ecosystem. This may take time though, as anonymouse indicated:
Just simply that software specifically adapted to the strengths and weaknesses of the the iPad will allow more efficient, effective delivery and use of information. That this will require development effort above and beyond using Citrix to hook them up to existing software, and that it will be worth it in the long run because, as great as this might seem now, the software they are running remotely obviously was not designed for an iPad, and, although very useful, it's almost certainly not the optimal way to use an iPad for this purpose.
CGC
I'm waiting... For posts about how hospitals should use Flash for x-rays and diagnostic charts...and how the iPad is clearly a sub-standard mobile touch screen pad because it lacks the ability to run Flash for Medical Emergencies - which Adobe will provide export for from Flash CS19 - due sometime in 2025.
People, people, people.
Mark was JOKING!!! Re-read what he said above in light of the Adobe/Apple/Flash history and current news on this.
JOKING!!! And a darned good one too!!!
Cross platform means lowest common denominator output. How many write once run everywhere java programs have you seen that were worth a darn? Maybe you shouldn't be calling people idiots when you are the one who is wrong.
If you had even bothered to read the original story you would have realised that people using VNC on an iPad to access their legacy applications is a clear example of the USER choosing to trade off cutting edge API utilisation in favor of being able to access already developed functionality in an improved form factor.
Clearly this usage scenario is valuable enough to justify the purchase of 100 iPads in one hospital alone and possibly further millions in other hospitals and educational institutions throughout the world.
Surely, once the users and it-professionals get acquainted with the new platform a desire will arise to develop iPad-native applications/interfaces to back end applications because of the improved look and feel but if these people had not had the easy access to a legacy base of applications they would have never bothered to try out the iPad in the first place.
One can imagine a tonne of similar scenarios where enterprises might want an easy port of legacy applications to the iPad using intermediary compatibility layers and once having established that the form factor works, is durable and satisfies the users they might well decide to invest in developing native applications.
This is freedom of choice and it enables a much broader range of options for consumers. This is what Steve Jobs has decided to take away from the platform. If we were to follow his braindead 'I-know-better-than-you' reasoning to its fullest and most consistent consequence then technologies such as VNC should be banned from the platform as much as other intermediary layers that ultimately 'lead to a sub-par experience for the user.'
Or - one of the 'first' areas...
I can see it as perfect for any place where you see 'officials' carrying any kind of clip board or where some kind of hand-held assistant may be utilized. Hotels, restaurants and hospitality management, building site management and architects, warehousing inventory, tour guide-ing and art galleries... Nothing like the scope of the general medical field but nonetheless.
For "officials", we would need a specialized model with a resistive touchscreen, which are much more precise when it comes to writing with a stylus.
Resistive touchscreens also work with gloves on
Dan
do you want to find a way to surf the web easely?
200linx.com works on all browsers: firefox, explorer, safari, chrome and even opera.
set this page as your home page, and see how internet becomes a lot easier.
its especially usefull for the new iPad and iPhone.
try it...
There have been a number of surveys that showed Doctors want to use these devices. 3/5 Docs said they want to do their work on the iPad.
We also use Citrix technology and 1 or 2 of these apps use flash technology. Since flash is running in the datacenter and being delivered to our devices; iPads and iPhones, the applications work great. We are taking time (1 hour) to publish a couple of Apps in the form factor of the iPad. They look and work great too. The speed of the device and Apps, is just amazing.
A suggestion to purchase more than 1-2 iPads at a time, is to talk with your Apple Account Executive. Although they don't get credit for the sale, they can help you get more devices.
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.
....It was a yoke. (joke for the literal among us)
In fact I posted that some where else on this site in another iPad thread.