rob53

Great! Let's start by forcing Comcast, ESPN, NBA, and CNN to only use HTML5 and not link to any sites that still use Flash--and I'd like to see that happen starting today, not after 2020. Every one of these sites use HTML5 or other non-Flash when accessed by iOS devices, including Safari on macOS when setting the user agent to iOS so we all know they can do it now. 

Soli said:

MacPro said:

It's a sign of the times when all the comments so far are about iOS not macOS / sigh

To be fair, I believe that iPhone sales outnumbered Mac sales in their very first year, and Mac sales have never been better. But I, personally, would like to see more Mac-related stuff.

For example, I've already tested beta 3 and I'm still having the Disk Utility and Safari issues I previous mentioned. Additionally, I still can't get HEVC videos to play despite the Release Notes saying it was now supported. Before Quicktime X would play the audio of the video with a white screen for the image, but now it says it can't play the file at all. However, I can load it in iTunes and it will play the audio, like with beta 2.

Don't believe we're supposed to talk about these beta releases but ....  On my 2011 MBP I am experiencing the common bug of the LCD backlight not turning back on after putting the MBP to sleep. Shining a light on the dark screen shows the running system but no way to get the LCD to turn back on without restarting. This is using the third public beta release so we're hoping the next public beta release has a fix or I doubt very many people will test it.

https://telehealth.org/blog/which-cloud-storage-services-are-hipaa-compliant/

This article is dated (May 2014) but it talks about HIPAA compliance, and lack of it, saying as of 2014, there isn't even any "HIPAA "compliance certification" (exists) for backup applications, cloud storage, or disaster recovery services." Some of this has changed but I don't know how much. When I was working, I didn't have to worry about systems with HIPAA information on them so I didn't investigate how difficult it would be. The article goes on to say that "Apple refuses to sign a BAA (Business Associate’s Agreements), so your information is not protected or compliant with your requirement by HIPAA in iCloud." Just because Apple hasn't signed this agreement doesn't mean their iCloud servers aren't capable of protecting HIPAA or anyone's data, it just means they haven't gone through the extensive and many times nonsensical requirements to get a piece of paper. I had to deal with lots of these government regulations and put out tons of paper describing how systems operated and how they were protected. The crazy thing is a lot of this did not really protect anything, it simply covered people's back sides. 

I don't believe Apple will end up building their own HIPAA-compliant (whatever that actually means) server, they will rely on IBM to provide and support that service. Apple doesn't build servers (even though we wish they would) so all they have to worry about is maintaining an approved level of security on the devices they actually control. Since most of their work has involved iOS devices and iOS devices are the most secure consumer mobile devices, they are a lot closer than any other manufacturer in obtaining any kind of government approval for securely and properly handling private medical information. The crazy thing is many companies continue to use faxes as approved methods for sending and receiving medical information when there's nothing really secure about this process. But rules are rules and if something was approved, then it must be secure (/s). 

My hope is that Apple can find a really good way to handle medical information, get someone in Washington DC to take the time to evaluate it, and then get all those corrupt medical agencies/hospitals/etc. and insurance companies to actually use it instead of taking the Toyota approach and trying to build something that isn't given away by Apple.

Food for thought: I just checked my insurance company, Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield, ANTM, and their market cap is $50B. "One in eight Americans receives coverage for their medical care through Anthem's affiliated plans." Quick math could put the value of medical insurance companies somewhere around $400B but I bet they're actually worth several times that amount.

I'd like to see some benchmarks comparing hardware RAID systems with RAID boxes running the latest version of SoftRAID. OWC sells both kinds but their benchmarks are showing SoftRAID runs faster and is easier to manage than hardware RAID systems. Maybe Promise will finally have a hardware RAID product that actually works properly with a Mac and runs fast with minimal overhead. I know OWC's RAIDs are limited to four drive bays but with HDD capacities going through the roof and prices dropping, having a four drive system can actually provide a lot of managed storage. Now if only those huge SSDs from SageMicro would come down in price we'd have an extremely fast RAID in a small footprint.

The ironic thing about anyone from SecurID seeing Apple is that the only product they ever wrote for Apple was a VPN client. No matter how many times I screamed at them to write a 2-factor logon authentication for OS X, they refused. I gave up several years ago so maybe they finally did something but not while I was complaining. Of course, they might have an Active Directory-type two-factor authentication process that might work for OS X but no native authentication so as far as I'm concerned, none of Apple's implementations have anything to do with SecurID patents because Apple had to come up with something that worked within OS X and iOS, something SecurID refused to do (at least for the longest time).