iPad missing high-priority features for healthcare use?
updated 05:55 pm EST, Fri February 5, 2010
Survey indicates strong demand for tablets
The healthcare industry has shown strong interest in tablet computers, however the iPad may be missing several important features requested by physicians, according to a Software Advice survey. Over half of respondents claimed they were very likely or somewhat likely to purchase a tablet sometime in the coming year.
Physicians participating in the survey indicated a desire to use the tablets for lab orders, prescription drug reference, notes, clinical decision support, e-prescribing, medical image viewing, and e-mail, among other tasks. Ease-of-use topped the list of reasons for purchasing a tablet, with software and durability following close behind.
The iPad's iPhone operating system may prove strong in the ease-of-use category. Physicians have noted, however, that the current App Store offerings do not include comprehensive software for managing electronic medical records (EMRs). The additional capabilities of the iPad may attract developers to create such a utility in the future, although this remains to be seen. Windows-based machines, or tablet-converted MacBooks, currently offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry.
Resistance to dust and liquids was considered the second-highest hardware spec requested by the surveyed individuals. Although third-party companies have already started creating iPad accessories before the device has shipped, the tablet does not offer any rugged protection in its native form. The iPad also lacks several other important features such as fingerprint access, barcode scanning, an integrated camera and an RFID reader.
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work. This has been the approach of Microsoft and hence no uptake," said one of the respondents. "A modal interface like the iPhone is more suitable to touchscreen use and makes more sense in this setting."
As the iPad has yet to arrive on the market, it is unclear how well it will perform against the variety of alternative products also set for release in 2010. Analysts have placed wide forecasts for the device, with many expecting several million units in 2010 and up to 10 million by the end of 2011.
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work" - Ok , I admit I was wrong there, but I just see how a lack of a file system on the iPad is going to work.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
What happens if the app get buggy and you want to reinstall? Ouch!
Anyway enjoy. There's a lot of work to be done by Apple first before it's accepted by the health care industry as a tool.
Except that it doesn't say that. The survey was among healthcare professionals, not just doctors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core
Sorry, but they only surveyed 350 'clinicians'.
Although in one part of the article they do state they had over 900,000 healthcare professionals worldwide using their software, they later referred to the same number as 'clinicians'.
According to Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: cli·ni·cian
Pronunciation: \\kli-ˈni-shən\\
Function: noun
Date: 1875
1 : a person qualified in the clinical practice of medicine, psychiatry, or psychology as distinguished from one specializing in laboratory or research techniques or in theory
2 : a person who conducts a clinic
(Sounds to me like it covers a lot more than just doctors, notwithstanding AI's casual inference).
i'd like to bring this in a different direction...
why do we rely so much on technology to get work done?
The iSlate (sorry, the iPad!) might make work easier in some way, but are we destined, as humans, to know less for the same job? I'm not trying to offend anyone, but I just feel that this is not a step in the right direction.
my two pennies, might not be worth much nowadays, but they're still nickel!
Technology can be a great help, especially to remind people to do something very important, like issue a proper dose of medicine at certain times, also to monitor people 24/7 in case someone falls asleep.
It also can take people's jobs away and provide less expensive products. If employing technology would take people's jobs away without reducing the price of a product, then I should say it shouldn't be employed because all it does then is make more profits at the people's cost.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
So you missed every thread and post talking about the File Sharing, exchanging and opening of files directly by assigning file type to app, and document-centric apps that allow the devs to assign applicable file types in iPhone OS v3.2?
No offense, but I had to install Citrix for a real estate client who bought a Mac only to realize her IE based software wouldn't work.
I really don't recommend it and it most likely won't work on the iPad/A4 processors anyway without a major rewrite.
I'm not offended, I didn't write the software.
For the past 16 years, I've worked for two of the top three integrated healthcare providers in a midwestern state. Both have a significant investment in Citrix for delivery of mission critical clinical applications (IE based and other) to the desktop. We're talking hundreds of Citrix servers (virtual and physical) and thousands of clients. Every technology has its issues, but properly architected it is a robust platform (I am not part of the Citrix Group, BTW).
People are already running emulated ICA clients in the SDK. If there are any compatibility issues, I highly doubt Citrix is going to leave them unaddressed for long. If the investment was made to create a client for the Touch/iPhone, it would make little sense to leave a device with a better form-factor for the intended usage unsupported. And the more clients you support, the more Citrix/Xen servers you sell. We're not talking VMWare money, but those licenses are not cheap. A big incentive!
Yea that's another issue, Apple's tendency to change things and not remain a constant force.
I think businesses would embrace the iPad if it ran a full OS UI like the Mac does
I think businesses would embrace the iPad if Apple guaranteed full long-term commitment.
As a businesses, I would still see too many "Look at Newton" shadows to be comfortable making an initial large-scale investment. Anything medical costs a fortune to deploy; the last thing anyone wants is to base their business on a costly iPad-specific app, only too see their investment orphaned down the line.
Maybe the the iPad will be a blockbuster and these concerns are silly. But when careers and even businesses are on the line, you need to be certain of your bets.
Yes it interferes with the patient monitors, any electromagnetic signals actually, 3G enabled laptops as well and I suspect 3G iPads will too, unless Apple has made sure that doesn't happen, how I would not know.
In fact I read hospitals use iPod Touch's instead of iPhones for that reason, the cell signal interference.
So perhaps the wifi versions will be ok.
Uh, wrong (if you're saying yes to no wi-fi in hospitals, it's hard to tell from your response). All of our hospitals and clinics have full wi-fi coverage and it is used for devices delivering clinical applications. Adding another wi-fi enabled device, like the iPad (as long as it doesn't have some other EMI issue), should not be a problem. We've used wireless networks in some form or another since the early 90's (and let me tell you the tablets used then were archaic).
My sense is the no cell-based devices in a clinical setting argument is somewhat like the debate of cell phones on airplanes, but you'll never get anyone in healthcare to admit it.
As a 26 year Apple user and seen NUMEROUS processor, hardware, UI and OS changes over the years, your best bet is to stick with a Windows solution in the business environment, it has the advantage of a much larger market share, stability in hardware and software UI and OS (outside of malware) and more third party solutions.
You might be able to use consumer level products from Apple in niche spots here and there, but Apple really doesn't pay attention to the needs and wants of the business or corporate market all that well.
As we speak Apple is already undergoing ANOTHER processor switch, it won't affect consumers all that much, but businesses who spend a lot of money on expensive software are going to get hit hard by the switch.
Apple is focused on the consumer market and that's why it has opened fancy stores in high traffic consumer locations. Not opening operations near heavy business locations, like industrial parks, business centers etc.
Sorry to say that, but it's the truth.
There is this fanboy fantasy that "only if 'this or that' then Apple could rule the world" but the fact is Apple doesn't give a rats ass about business or corporate market, that was CEO's Scully's play, not Steve Jobs.
Steve is about making devices easier to use for consumers and selling a lot of hardware in the meanwhile. If he was into business, he would sell OS X separate of hardware for ATM machines, POS devices, CAD/CAM machines and everything else the business world needs and he wouldn't be locking his hardware and software down.
I design and develop applications used in hospitals for a living; I believe I have some credibility in this area. I agree that the concept of adopting a new operating system platform may be a bit challenging to hospital IT departments, but it is for this reason that the closed ecosystem of the iPad actually works for the device, whereas a full MacOS implementation would not. Why? Because it is virtually impossible for the user of the device to screw it up. Hospital IT staff can disable the installation of applications, iTunes, YouTube - this is a huge plus for them.
I also have to say I found your statements about stability in software, hardware, and UI to really stretch credulity. As I said, I design and develop apps for health care settings (large, enterprise class software including medical records) and I am familiar with what is out there. In addition, I develop for Windows variants (using Visual Studio on Windows, of course) and for these mobile devices (on a Mac, of course), and I have never had the stability issues on the Apple side that I have had with Windows. Listen, the reality is that the development environment on Windows is not even as stable as its Mac counterpart (to say nothing of the actual software) and I have many many frustrating hours wrestling with Visual Studio under my belt; almost any windows developer will acknowledge having trouble with Visual Studio. More to the point, anyone who wants to assert that Windows has some vaunted stability edge over MacOS must be smoking something perceptually distorting: it just isn't true, and I do not have an allegiance to Apple's OS.
Finally just let me address health care software and the idea that these systems are amazing, stable, and incredibly rigorously built. Listen, I am familiar with what is out there, and the vast majority of these systems verge on pure crap. Software for health care settings is terribly behind the times, and much of it is sitting on top of nearly ancient technology platforms. Most hospitals, for instance, still use IE6 despite the fact that it is horrifically flawed from the standpoint of security and the stability you trumpeted. In addition, much of it is just terribly designed and is difficult to use; wildly user unfriendly in fact. In my opinion, the industry could benefit simply from using an SDK that enforces usability principles, as the Apple SDK does.
Listen, I'm not trying to be unkind, but I really think you are wrong on almost every point.
I design and develop applications used in hospitals for a living; I believe I have some credibility in this area. I agree that the concept of adopting a new operating system platform may be a bit challenging to hospital IT departments, but it is for this reason that the closed ecosystem of the iPad actually works for the device, whereas a full MacOS implementation would not. Why? Because it is virtually impossible for the user of the device to screw it up. Hospital IT staff can disable the installation of applications, iTunes, YouTube - this is a huge plus for them.
I also have to say I found your statements about stability in software, hardware, and UI to really stretch credulity. As I said, I design and develop apps for health care settings (large, enterprise class software including medical records) and I am familiar with what is out there. In addition, I develop for Windows variants and for these mobile devices (on a Mac, of course), and I have never had the stability issues on the Apple side that I have had with Windows. Listen, the reality is that the development environment on Windows is not even as stable as its Mac counterpart (to say nothing of the actual software) and I have many many frustrating hours wrestling with Visual Studio under my belt; almost any windows developer will acknowledge having trouble with Visual Studio. More to the point, anyone who wants to assert that Windows has some vaunted stability edge over MacOS must be smoking something perceptually distorting: it just isn't true, and I do not have an allegiance to Apple's OS.
Finally just let me address health care software and the idea that these systems are amazing, stable, and incredibly rigorously built. Listen, I am familiar with what is out there, and the vast majority of these systems verge on pure crap. Software for health care settings is terribly behind the times, and much of it is sitting on top of nearly ancient technology platforms. Most hospitals, for instance, still use IE6 despite the fact that it is horrifically flawed from the standpoint of security and the stability you trumpeted. In addition, much of it is just terribly designed and is difficult to use; wildly user unfriendly in fact. In my opinion, the industry could benefit simply from using an SDK that enforces usability principles, as the Apple SDK does.
Listen, I'm not trying to be unkind, but I really think you are wrong on almost every point.
If you tell me you work for McKesson, I'm going to cry.
If you tell me you work for McKesson, I'm going to cry.
I don't - my employer shall remain un-named. My reason for bringing it up at all was to simply say "look, I have an actual basis upon which to speak to this subject matter." Most of the folks pontificating here don't. The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
I don't - my employer shall remain un-named. My reason for bringing it up at all was to simply say "look, I have an actual basis upon which to speak to this subject matter." Most of the folks pontificating here don't. The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
I was just trying to get a rise out of you.
I couldn't agree more with most everything you've said. We were just discussing how we need to prepare for the iPad onslaught and if, at the same time, we should start providing some level of support for Macs in a limited capacity.
Now onto more important things.. How's the healthcare IT job market in OC? I need to get out of this God forsaken weather hell-hole I live in!
The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
There are always detractors and they will fight their corner bitterly. I don't think it is a rational thing - more an inherent suspicion of anything 'new'. They often have a very specific idea of what Apple products should do and how they must be used. It is frustrating when threads get hijacked by obstinate detractors determined to cut down open minded exploratory conversation by repeating themselves endlessly. Personally I can see why people may not want or need the ipad. I understand there are questions and speculations as to why features such as multitasking is limited but I cannot for the life of me understand the narrow minded view many people have and why they cannot reason their way to see the positive aspects to this device. Many seem to entirely fail to see the incredible potential this device has right the across the board, be it for entertainment, education or professional use.
So you missed every thread and post talking about the File Sharing, exchanging and opening of files directly by assigning file type to app, and document-centric apps that allow the devs to assign applicable file types in iPhone OS v3.2?
To be fair. Apple has over promised and under delivered with every iPhone OS since they changed the mobile market.
Apple has a very sad track record of only giving the users what will drive up market share before the next release of the iPhone OS (Can't speak for Mac OSX, not a user).
From what I've read the "file system" will make the OS only aware of the files that directly use the app being used.
If that is the case, and if Apple chooses to wait almost half a year to release 4.0 for the iPhone then Android will eventually take over. Android is updated with every new feature as well as every new Chip that hits the market.
Even with 3.2 Apple still doesn't have an OS that compares to Microsoft Mobile 6.0. This doesn't even take into account for the current offerings from all of the big 4 OS's for mobile.
No ability to offer an OS with a folder structure, lack of Multi-tasking for all 3rd party apps and lack of Flash will put a great Phone with a lot of potential back to where Mac OS was back in the 90's.
Apple already misused their power to make the Amazon cave to the publishers. I really don't want to pay more for a digital book than a paperback book. Steve Jobs F'd that up for the entire e-book market.
Edit. I don't buy hardback books. When I finish a good book I like to pass it on to a friend that has the same interest. He/she will pass it along as well. I've purchased about a 1,000 books at least in my life but have maybe 20 currently in my house.
I couldn't agree more with most everything you've said. We were just discussing how we need to prepare for the iPad onslaught and if, at the same time, we should start providing some level of support for Macs in a limited capacity.
Now onto more important things.. How's the healthcare IT job market in OC? I need to get out of this God forsaken weather hell-hole I live in!
Not many HIT software vendors here for a developer like me. Always seem to be lots of openings listed at area hospitals for internal IT staff, though.
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work" - Ok , I admit I was wrong there, but I just see how a lack of a file system on the iPad is going to work.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
What happens if the app get buggy and you want to reinstall? Ouch!
Anyway enjoy. There's a lot of work to be done by Apple first before it's accepted by the health care industry as a tool.
Don't believe everything you read.
Physicians have noted, however, that the current App Store offerings do not include comprehensive software for managing electronic medical records (EMRs).
If I go to my doctor's office, and he/she punches my information into a $2.99 app downloaded from the app store (coincidentally, written by the same person who created 5 different fart apps), I'm going to the veterinarian across the hall for my exam, thank you.
The additional capabilities of the iPad may attract developers to create such a utility in the future, although this remains to be seen. Windows-based machines, or tablet-converted MacBooks, currently offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry.
How does a "tablet-converted MacBook" offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry vs. a regular MacBook? The real issue is that there isn't a lot of this stuff (especially for large enterprises) developed for Mac, no?
This MAY just take off because.... wait for it.... it's not that expensive! Compared to buying a tablet PC, or a proprietary tablet (effing expensive) or a medium-grade laptop and a $400.00, 70 lb. cart to wheel the thing around on, $499.00 to $699.00 is cheap.
That's not to say Apple couldn't do something stupid to kill this, like offer crappy support to the enterprise, or something along those lines...
To be fair. Apple has over promised and under delivered with every iPhone OS since they changed the mobile market.
Apple has a very sad track record of only giving the users what will drive up market share before the next release of the iPhone OS (Can't speak for Mac OSX, not a user).
From what I've read the "file system" will make the OS only aware of the files that directly use the app being used.
If that is the case, and if Apple chooses to wait almost half a year to release 4.0 for the iPhone then Android will eventually take over. Android is updated with every new feature as well as every new Chip that hits the market.
Even with 3.2 Apple still doesn't have an OS that compares to Microsoft Mobile 6.0. This doesn't even take into account for the current offerings from all of the big 4 OS's for mobile.
No ability to offer an OS with a folder structure, lack of Multi-tasking for All OS's and lack of Flash will put a great Phone with a lot of potential back to where Mac OS was back in the 90's.
Apple already mis-used their power to make the Amazon cave to the publishers. I really don't want to pay more for a digital book than a paperback book. Steve Jobs F'd that up for the entire industry.
Angus, why do you need a complete hierarchical file system on a mobile device with very limited internal storage? These devices are designed to save files to the cloud or to sync to a desktop. FYI, in a health-care setting, not saving locally on the device is a plus, not a negative.
RE: Android - I think Android is cool, but Android has had over two years now to 'take over' as you put it, and that has not happened. I haven't observed that Google really knows how to compete with Apple in this space - their introduction of Nexus One was just really not handled well at all; I really hope they learn from that experience, however. Your point is well taken: complacency in the face of your competition is never a good thing. I think you are over-blowing the nature of the threat at the present time, however.
On book pricing: aren't these ebook prices for the equivalent of 1st edition hardbacks? If so, the 13 - 15 price range we see being quoted is nowhere near the cost of the actual (physical) book.
But all of this is a digression - what does it have to do with the use of the iPad in health care?
Comments
iPad missing high-priority features for healthcare use?
updated 05:55 pm EST, Fri February 5, 2010
Survey indicates strong demand for tablets
The healthcare industry has shown strong interest in tablet computers, however the iPad may be missing several important features requested by physicians, according to a Software Advice survey. Over half of respondents claimed they were very likely or somewhat likely to purchase a tablet sometime in the coming year.
Physicians participating in the survey indicated a desire to use the tablets for lab orders, prescription drug reference, notes, clinical decision support, e-prescribing, medical image viewing, and e-mail, among other tasks. Ease-of-use topped the list of reasons for purchasing a tablet, with software and durability following close behind.
The iPad's iPhone operating system may prove strong in the ease-of-use category. Physicians have noted, however, that the current App Store offerings do not include comprehensive software for managing electronic medical records (EMRs). The additional capabilities of the iPad may attract developers to create such a utility in the future, although this remains to be seen. Windows-based machines, or tablet-converted MacBooks, currently offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry.
Resistance to dust and liquids was considered the second-highest hardware spec requested by the surveyed individuals. Although third-party companies have already started creating iPad accessories before the device has shipped, the tablet does not offer any rugged protection in its native form. The iPad also lacks several other important features such as fingerprint access, barcode scanning, an integrated camera and an RFID reader.
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work. This has been the approach of Microsoft and hence no uptake," said one of the respondents. "A modal interface like the iPhone is more suitable to touchscreen use and makes more sense in this setting."
As the iPad has yet to arrive on the market, it is unclear how well it will perform against the variety of alternative products also set for release in 2010. Analysts have placed wide forecasts for the device, with many expecting several million units in 2010 and up to 10 million by the end of 2011.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/02/...d.for.tablets/
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work" - Ok , I admit I was wrong there, but I just see how a lack of a file system on the iPad is going to work.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
What happens if the app get buggy and you want to reinstall? Ouch!
Anyway enjoy. There's a lot of work to be done by Apple first before it's accepted by the health care industry as a tool.
Except that it doesn't say that. The survey was among healthcare professionals, not just doctors.
Sorry, but they only surveyed 350 'clinicians'.
Although in one part of the article they do state they had over 900,000 healthcare professionals worldwide using their software, they later referred to the same number as 'clinicians'.
According to Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: cli·ni·cian
Pronunciation: \\kli-ˈni-shən\\
Function: noun
Date: 1875
1 : a person qualified in the clinical practice of medicine, psychiatry, or psychology as distinguished from one specializing in laboratory or research techniques or in theory
2 : a person who conducts a clinic
(Sounds to me like it covers a lot more than just doctors, notwithstanding AI's casual inference).
i'd like to bring this in a different direction...
why do we rely so much on technology to get work done?
The iSlate (sorry, the iPad!) might make work easier in some way, but are we destined, as humans, to know less for the same job? I'm not trying to offend anyone, but I just feel that this is not a step in the right direction.
my two pennies, might not be worth much nowadays, but they're still nickel!
Technology can be a great help, especially to remind people to do something very important, like issue a proper dose of medicine at certain times, also to monitor people 24/7 in case someone falls asleep.
It also can take people's jobs away and provide less expensive products. If employing technology would take people's jobs away without reducing the price of a product, then I should say it shouldn't be employed because all it does then is make more profits at the people's cost.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
So you missed every thread and post talking about the File Sharing, exchanging and opening of files directly by assigning file type to app, and document-centric apps that allow the devs to assign applicable file types in iPhone OS v3.2?
No offense, but I had to install Citrix for a real estate client who bought a Mac only to realize her IE based software wouldn't work.
I really don't recommend it and it most likely won't work on the iPad/A4 processors anyway without a major rewrite.
I'm not offended, I didn't write the software.
For the past 16 years, I've worked for two of the top three integrated healthcare providers in a midwestern state. Both have a significant investment in Citrix for delivery of mission critical clinical applications (IE based and other) to the desktop. We're talking hundreds of Citrix servers (virtual and physical) and thousands of clients. Every technology has its issues, but properly architected it is a robust platform (I am not part of the Citrix Group, BTW).
People are already running emulated ICA clients in the SDK. If there are any compatibility issues, I highly doubt Citrix is going to leave them unaddressed for long. If the investment was made to create a client for the Touch/iPhone, it would make little sense to leave a device with a better form-factor for the intended usage unsupported. And the more clients you support, the more Citrix/Xen servers you sell. We're not talking VMWare money, but those licenses are not cheap. A big incentive!
Yea that's another issue, Apple's tendency to change things and not remain a constant force.
I think businesses would embrace the iPad if it ran a full OS UI like the Mac does
I think businesses would embrace the iPad if Apple guaranteed full long-term commitment.
As a businesses, I would still see too many "Look at Newton" shadows to be comfortable making an initial large-scale investment. Anything medical costs a fortune to deploy; the last thing anyone wants is to base their business on a costly iPad-specific app, only too see their investment orphaned down the line.
Maybe the the iPad will be a blockbuster and these concerns are silly. But when careers and even businesses are on the line, you need to be certain of your bets.
Yes it interferes with the patient monitors, any electromagnetic signals actually, 3G enabled laptops as well and I suspect 3G iPads will too, unless Apple has made sure that doesn't happen, how I would not know.
In fact I read hospitals use iPod Touch's instead of iPhones for that reason, the cell signal interference.
So perhaps the wifi versions will be ok.
Uh, wrong (if you're saying yes to no wi-fi in hospitals, it's hard to tell from your response). All of our hospitals and clinics have full wi-fi coverage and it is used for devices delivering clinical applications. Adding another wi-fi enabled device, like the iPad (as long as it doesn't have some other EMI issue), should not be a problem. We've used wireless networks in some form or another since the early 90's (and let me tell you the tablets used then were archaic).
My sense is the no cell-based devices in a clinical setting argument is somewhat like the debate of cell phones on airplanes, but you'll never get anyone in healthcare to admit it.
As a 26 year Apple user and seen NUMEROUS processor, hardware, UI and OS changes over the years, your best bet is to stick with a Windows solution in the business environment, it has the advantage of a much larger market share, stability in hardware and software UI and OS (outside of malware) and more third party solutions.
You might be able to use consumer level products from Apple in niche spots here and there, but Apple really doesn't pay attention to the needs and wants of the business or corporate market all that well.
As we speak Apple is already undergoing ANOTHER processor switch, it won't affect consumers all that much, but businesses who spend a lot of money on expensive software are going to get hit hard by the switch.
Apple is focused on the consumer market and that's why it has opened fancy stores in high traffic consumer locations. Not opening operations near heavy business locations, like industrial parks, business centers etc.
Sorry to say that, but it's the truth.
There is this fanboy fantasy that "only if 'this or that' then Apple could rule the world" but the fact is Apple doesn't give a rats ass about business or corporate market, that was CEO's Scully's play, not Steve Jobs.
Steve is about making devices easier to use for consumers and selling a lot of hardware in the meanwhile. If he was into business, he would sell OS X separate of hardware for ATM machines, POS devices, CAD/CAM machines and everything else the business world needs and he wouldn't be locking his hardware and software down.
I design and develop applications used in hospitals for a living; I believe I have some credibility in this area. I agree that the concept of adopting a new operating system platform may be a bit challenging to hospital IT departments, but it is for this reason that the closed ecosystem of the iPad actually works for the device, whereas a full MacOS implementation would not. Why? Because it is virtually impossible for the user of the device to screw it up. Hospital IT staff can disable the installation of applications, iTunes, YouTube - this is a huge plus for them.
I also have to say I found your statements about stability in software, hardware, and UI to really stretch credulity. As I said, I design and develop apps for health care settings (large, enterprise class software including medical records) and I am familiar with what is out there. In addition, I develop for Windows variants (using Visual Studio on Windows, of course) and for these mobile devices (on a Mac, of course), and I have never had the stability issues on the Apple side that I have had with Windows. Listen, the reality is that the development environment on Windows is not even as stable as its Mac counterpart (to say nothing of the actual software) and I have many many frustrating hours wrestling with Visual Studio under my belt; almost any windows developer will acknowledge having trouble with Visual Studio. More to the point, anyone who wants to assert that Windows has some vaunted stability edge over MacOS must be smoking something perceptually distorting: it just isn't true, and I do not have an allegiance to Apple's OS.
Finally just let me address health care software and the idea that these systems are amazing, stable, and incredibly rigorously built. Listen, I am familiar with what is out there, and the vast majority of these systems verge on pure crap. Software for health care settings is terribly behind the times, and much of it is sitting on top of nearly ancient technology platforms. Most hospitals, for instance, still use IE6 despite the fact that it is horrifically flawed from the standpoint of security and the stability you trumpeted. In addition, much of it is just terribly designed and is difficult to use; wildly user unfriendly in fact. In my opinion, the industry could benefit simply from using an SDK that enforces usability principles, as the Apple SDK does.
Listen, I'm not trying to be unkind, but I really think you are wrong on almost every point.
I design and develop applications used in hospitals for a living; I believe I have some credibility in this area. I agree that the concept of adopting a new operating system platform may be a bit challenging to hospital IT departments, but it is for this reason that the closed ecosystem of the iPad actually works for the device, whereas a full MacOS implementation would not. Why? Because it is virtually impossible for the user of the device to screw it up. Hospital IT staff can disable the installation of applications, iTunes, YouTube - this is a huge plus for them.
I also have to say I found your statements about stability in software, hardware, and UI to really stretch credulity. As I said, I design and develop apps for health care settings (large, enterprise class software including medical records) and I am familiar with what is out there. In addition, I develop for Windows variants and for these mobile devices (on a Mac, of course), and I have never had the stability issues on the Apple side that I have had with Windows. Listen, the reality is that the development environment on Windows is not even as stable as its Mac counterpart (to say nothing of the actual software) and I have many many frustrating hours wrestling with Visual Studio under my belt; almost any windows developer will acknowledge having trouble with Visual Studio. More to the point, anyone who wants to assert that Windows has some vaunted stability edge over MacOS must be smoking something perceptually distorting: it just isn't true, and I do not have an allegiance to Apple's OS.
Finally just let me address health care software and the idea that these systems are amazing, stable, and incredibly rigorously built. Listen, I am familiar with what is out there, and the vast majority of these systems verge on pure crap. Software for health care settings is terribly behind the times, and much of it is sitting on top of nearly ancient technology platforms. Most hospitals, for instance, still use IE6 despite the fact that it is horrifically flawed from the standpoint of security and the stability you trumpeted. In addition, much of it is just terribly designed and is difficult to use; wildly user unfriendly in fact. In my opinion, the industry could benefit simply from using an SDK that enforces usability principles, as the Apple SDK does.
Listen, I'm not trying to be unkind, but I really think you are wrong on almost every point.
If you tell me you work for McKesson, I'm going to cry.
If you tell me you work for McKesson, I'm going to cry.
I don't - my employer shall remain un-named. My reason for bringing it up at all was to simply say "look, I have an actual basis upon which to speak to this subject matter." Most of the folks pontificating here don't. The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
I don't - my employer shall remain un-named. My reason for bringing it up at all was to simply say "look, I have an actual basis upon which to speak to this subject matter." Most of the folks pontificating here don't. The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
I was just trying to get a rise out of you.
I couldn't agree more with most everything you've said. We were just discussing how we need to prepare for the iPad onslaught and if, at the same time, we should start providing some level of support for Macs in a limited capacity.
Now onto more important things.. How's the healthcare IT job market in OC? I need to get out of this God forsaken weather hell-hole I live in!
When did Citrix ever make a PPC version?
Google "citrix power pc tiger" or variations thereof and all will be revealed.
The actual clinicians that have chimed in have for the most part been positive or at least interested - I'm not sure what is motivating the detractors. They sound a lot like Ballmer when he called the iPhone a toy.
My own expectation is that the iPad will get a lot of interest from health-care institutions and from associated software vendors; this is already happening, in fact. I think the device has much better chances of gaining traction than previous tablet devices have (for a number of reasons), and I think there is a high probability that you'll see physicians and staff carrying these devices around hospitals very soon unless Apple makes some unforeseen and disastrous error.
There are always detractors and they will fight their corner bitterly. I don't think it is a rational thing - more an inherent suspicion of anything 'new'. They often have a very specific idea of what Apple products should do and how they must be used. It is frustrating when threads get hijacked by obstinate detractors determined to cut down open minded exploratory conversation by repeating themselves endlessly. Personally I can see why people may not want or need the ipad. I understand there are questions and speculations as to why features such as multitasking is limited but I cannot for the life of me understand the narrow minded view many people have and why they cannot reason their way to see the positive aspects to this device. Many seem to entirely fail to see the incredible potential this device has right the across the board, be it for entertainment, education or professional use.
So you missed every thread and post talking about the File Sharing, exchanging and opening of files directly by assigning file type to app, and document-centric apps that allow the devs to assign applicable file types in iPhone OS v3.2?
To be fair. Apple has over promised and under delivered with every iPhone OS since they changed the mobile market.
Apple has a very sad track record of only giving the users what will drive up market share before the next release of the iPhone OS (Can't speak for Mac OSX, not a user).
From what I've read the "file system" will make the OS only aware of the files that directly use the app being used.
If that is the case, and if Apple chooses to wait almost half a year to release 4.0 for the iPhone then Android will eventually take over. Android is updated with every new feature as well as every new Chip that hits the market.
Even with 3.2 Apple still doesn't have an OS that compares to Microsoft Mobile 6.0. This doesn't even take into account for the current offerings from all of the big 4 OS's for mobile.
No ability to offer an OS with a folder structure, lack of Multi-tasking for all 3rd party apps and lack of Flash will put a great Phone with a lot of potential back to where Mac OS was back in the 90's.
Apple already misused their power to make the Amazon cave to the publishers. I really don't want to pay more for a digital book than a paperback book. Steve Jobs F'd that up for the entire e-book market.
Edit. I don't buy hardback books. When I finish a good book I like to pass it on to a friend that has the same interest. He/she will pass it along as well. I've purchased about a 1,000 books at least in my life but have maybe 20 currently in my house.
I was just trying to get a rise out of you.
I couldn't agree more with most everything you've said. We were just discussing how we need to prepare for the iPad onslaught and if, at the same time, we should start providing some level of support for Macs in a limited capacity.
Now onto more important things.. How's the healthcare IT job market in OC? I need to get out of this God forsaken weather hell-hole I live in!
Not many HIT software vendors here for a developer like me. Always seem to be lots of openings listed at area hospitals for internal IT staff, though.
Ahh ha!! more information surfaces...
http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/02/...d.for.tablets/
"Shoehorning a desktop OS into a tablet does NOT work" - Ok , I admit I was wrong there, but I just see how a lack of a file system on the iPad is going to work.
Deleting a app deletes all the files associated with it, including your own, isn't going to work very well.
What happens if the app get buggy and you want to reinstall? Ouch!
Anyway enjoy. There's a lot of work to be done by Apple first before it's accepted by the health care industry as a tool.
Don't believe everything you read.
Physicians have noted, however, that the current App Store offerings do not include comprehensive software for managing electronic medical records (EMRs).
If I go to my doctor's office, and he/she punches my information into a $2.99 app downloaded from the app store (coincidentally, written by the same person who created 5 different fart apps), I'm going to the veterinarian across the hall for my exam, thank you.
The additional capabilities of the iPad may attract developers to create such a utility in the future, although this remains to be seen. Windows-based machines, or tablet-converted MacBooks, currently offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry.
How does a "tablet-converted MacBook" offer a wider selection of advanced software titles for the healthcare industry vs. a regular MacBook? The real issue is that there isn't a lot of this stuff (especially for large enterprises) developed for Mac, no?
This MAY just take off because.... wait for it.... it's not that expensive! Compared to buying a tablet PC, or a proprietary tablet (effing expensive) or a medium-grade laptop and a $400.00, 70 lb. cart to wheel the thing around on, $499.00 to $699.00 is cheap.
That's not to say Apple couldn't do something stupid to kill this, like offer crappy support to the enterprise, or something along those lines...
To be fair. Apple has over promised and under delivered with every iPhone OS since they changed the mobile market.
Apple has a very sad track record of only giving the users what will drive up market share before the next release of the iPhone OS (Can't speak for Mac OSX, not a user).
From what I've read the "file system" will make the OS only aware of the files that directly use the app being used.
If that is the case, and if Apple chooses to wait almost half a year to release 4.0 for the iPhone then Android will eventually take over. Android is updated with every new feature as well as every new Chip that hits the market.
Even with 3.2 Apple still doesn't have an OS that compares to Microsoft Mobile 6.0. This doesn't even take into account for the current offerings from all of the big 4 OS's for mobile.
No ability to offer an OS with a folder structure, lack of Multi-tasking for All OS's and lack of Flash will put a great Phone with a lot of potential back to where Mac OS was back in the 90's.
Apple already mis-used their power to make the Amazon cave to the publishers. I really don't want to pay more for a digital book than a paperback book. Steve Jobs F'd that up for the entire industry.
Angus, why do you need a complete hierarchical file system on a mobile device with very limited internal storage? These devices are designed to save files to the cloud or to sync to a desktop. FYI, in a health-care setting, not saving locally on the device is a plus, not a negative.
RE: Android - I think Android is cool, but Android has had over two years now to 'take over' as you put it, and that has not happened. I haven't observed that Google really knows how to compete with Apple in this space - their introduction of Nexus One was just really not handled well at all; I really hope they learn from that experience, however. Your point is well taken: complacency in the face of your competition is never a good thing. I think you are over-blowing the nature of the threat at the present time, however.
On book pricing: aren't these ebook prices for the equivalent of 1st edition hardbacks? If so, the 13 - 15 price range we see being quoted is nowhere near the cost of the actual (physical) book.
But all of this is a digression - what does it have to do with the use of the iPad in health care?
Four out of five physicians don't recommend the iPad for daily use.
Three out of five doctors still write prescriptions by hand on a paper pad.
Not many HIT software vendors here for a developer like me. Always seem to be lots of openings listed at area hospitals for internal IT staff, though.
Newport Beach, here I come!