×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

97 comments

A non story (1)

cloricus (691063) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194300)

This really shouldn't be a story, the likely case is the Labor government wont return to power at all.

If they do it will be with the Greens holding a deciding vote in policy and given their position to reckless spending like this they'd harpoon the idea anyway. This would be news if in three months time doctors were actually being given iPads to do their work via.

Re:A non story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194314)

The bookies say labour's almost a sure bet. Something like $1.25 vs ~$4.00, and "apparently" (on the news) the bookies almost always get it right in Australia.

Re:A non story, and, an old one at that (2, Informative)

cloricus (691063) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194346)

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/355318/ipads_go_under_knife_victorian_hospitals/

Looks like this has been floating around for a good while.

The real story (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194758)

Australian State Govt. To Fund iPads For Niggers.

Re:A non story (1)

strack (1051390) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194782)

reckless spending? youve been listening to Baillieu and Abbot a bit too much methinks. there like fucking parrots with that phrase. meanwhile the economys steaming along and the dollar is at parity with the us dollar.

Re:A non story (4, Insightful)

cloricus (691063) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194990)

Like the quality of your post, the opposition in the state and federal parliaments is a waste of time. If Baillieu was any good he'd win this election hands down over the horrific failure by the Brumby government regarding the bush fires. Instead we get yet another Liberal scare campaign, when they could be getting down to real issues.

My reference to reckless spending is regarding the Myki system which cost a billion dollars, and counting, to replace a system that wasn't broken. Worse still, the Metcard system it replaced is still required and the public transport network is still unreliable!

If you consider a billion dollars in context: We could have just had free public transport for 1-3 years without a single ticket instead of this failure. That's based on back of a napkin maths but a billion dollars buys a lot of zone 1 dailies. And it's not the only waste I can point to.

Re:A non story (2, Informative)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34197736)

I don't consider this reckless spending. the iPad is in use in many hospitals in the US by providers, not as a toy, but in real useful ways.

In our case, because there is a Citrix plugin for the iPad, providers can log into our informatics system on an iPad via wireless and do basically anything they can do from the PC they normally use. Place orders, view results, read documentation, more or less anything.

Because the iPhone uses the same plugin, they can use those in a pinch too, say from the golf course or what have you.

These devices may not seem to fill a niche in our homes that isn't already covered for most people, but they can provide a lot of flexibility and function in health care.

Re:A non story (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#34200926)

You're comparing the Victorian govt. with US providers.

The cynicism stems from their past failure to deliver IT systems on budget and on time. Usually it goes to tender and ends up being monstrously more expensive and bloated than originally planned. As in the myki disaster referred to earlier.

Re:A non story (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34203932)

Oh, thank God taxpayers can fund doctors to spend more time golfing! I was getting worried that the golf subsidies had run out.

Re:A non story (1)

Pseudonym (62607) | more than 3 years ago | (#34203024)

My reference to reckless spending is regarding the Myki system which cost a billion dollars, and counting, to replace a system that wasn't broken.

It was broken. Quite literally, in fact. One of the reasons why there are fewer Metcard issuing machines and validating machines than they were is that they've been scavenged for parts that you can't buy any more.

Yes, Myki was badly managed. Yes we could have gone with another system like Oyster more cheaply. But you also have to weigh that against the fact that Victoria uses an outdated zone system, so whatever scheme you use would have to be localised. And no, you couldn't fix that because it wouldn't fly politically; Victorians have a heightened sense of "this change is clearly going to screw us over" whether it's true or not. (Admittedly, this is partly because we got burned by Citylink and Eastlink, where this actually was true.)

In summary: Metcard wasn't going to last much longer, and anything you replaced it with was going to be a dog's breakfast no matter what you did. Welcome to Victoria!

Corporate sponsorship for elections (-1, Flamebait)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194302)

Is this kind of thing legal? This really sounds a lot like explicit corporate sponsorship. If he'd just said they'd get a mobile tablet, it'd be fine.

Also, do you want Apple to control what kind of software your health care system can use?

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Insightful)

ZackSchil (560462) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194342)

He is promising iPads because they are popular and people want them. Moreover, they know what one is.

And Apple doesn't control enterprise stuff, which is likely what a hospital would use.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196466)

Are you saying he's specifically trying to court the vote of doctors? I find that unlikely - there can't possibly be enough doctors spread around the country to sway the vote, even if he outright bought their votes for dollars (not to mention it's likely to annoy other people working with the doctors who then might vote elsewhere). Mind you, I'm not sure offering to pour money into flashy tablets is the right way to win votes either, unless there have been conclusive tests to show significant gains from doing so, and as GP said, why he'd specifically say iPads when a standard tablet PC is more likely to be easier to integrate with the hospital's current systems and to be able to install custom applications (especially if Aus is anything like the UK, where Windows is pretty much the only option in hospitals). Are we missing the real message or is this just a case of clueless politician tries to piggyback on the popularity of a new tech toy?

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

Dashiva Dan (1786136) | more than 3 years ago | (#34197656)

I think there's a pretty good chance this will cost him more votes than it gains him.
Really, the only votes this will get him is from apple fanbois that care more about their favourite brand than wasteful spending.
People who care about spending, or dislike apple (Which while less outspoken I think are still a majority) won't vote for him because of this, I'd think.
And, in Australia, everyone has to vote, unlike the USA where it's optional, which changes the demographics of voters from just the 'politically minded' to 'everyone', which needs to be taken into consideration.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Interesting)

SystematicPsycho (456042) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194356)

Sounds fair they should go to tender and be fair to all the other tablet pcs and not mention "ipad" directly. Chances are the idea won't fly anyway so there will never be ipads to complain about, people know what an ipad is not a tablet PC this is an election stunt :\

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (3, Informative)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194370)

Is this kind of thing legal?

Why wouldn't it be?

Also, do you want Apple to control what kind of software your health care system can use?

Apple does not "control what kind of software [they] can use". It's also extremely unlikely there are any legitimate medical apps that are being outright rejected from Apple's store (which, contrary to popular misconception, is not the only official way to distribute iOS apps).

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194618)

Wow, can you say brainwashed?

You're joking right? You think APL would allow a picture of, say, a woman's breast or penis? For crying out loud, they banned an e-reader for including the Karma Sutra (cited just one example out of the 1,000s/10,000s of books) and only relented when the PR got a little hot. As far as I know, the Karma Sutra are DRAWINGS, not even real photographs. I guess you're right in that sense. They'd have to compromise and strip out any of that naughty content.

And yes, it's the only way to distribute native apps (without compromising your device security via jailbraking). You could have a beta / unapproved app, but that's restricted to about 1,000 copies. It's by far not enough for an entire country's hospitals.

You can't possibly mean HTML5 application when you say "official way to distribute i OS apps" because HTML5 by definition is device neutral (unless, of course, APL corrupted the standard or are using non-standard extensions which would make it not HTML5 compliant and should not be called HTML5).
If this is what you meant, I'll skip your ignorance and say that the government should be holding a bidding process for all companies to put forward their bids. I mean, if any dynamic content in an HTML5 application was involved, Android 2.2 would render it twice as fast: http://www.blackcj.com/blog/2010/09/17/flash-outperforms-html5-on-mobile-devices/, or if you used Flash, 2.5x faster.

Samsung could easily put forward it's Galaxy Tab and offer a cheaper, better, and SMALLER with a user-swappable battery pack in case you forget to charge it, and a front AND back cameras to video chat with other doctors / patients or show live pictures of an operation for a second opinion?

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (3, Insightful)

PhunkySchtuff (208108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194708)

The App Store isn't the only way to get apps onto iOS devices.
Read up about Enterprise distribution of applications without the app store.
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/Enterprise_Deployment_Guide.pdf [apple.com]

Page 63:
You can distribute iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad applications to your users.
If you want to install iPhone OS applications that you’ve developed, you distribute the application to your users, who install the applications using iTunes.
Applications from the online App Store work on iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad without any additional steps. If you develop an application that you want to distribute yourself, it must be digitally signed with a certificate issued by Apple. You must also provide your users with a distribution provisioning profile that allows their device to use the application.
The process for deploying your own applications is:
  Register for enterprise development with Apple.
  Sign your applications using your certificate.
  Create an enterprise distribution provisioning profile that authorizes devices to use applications you’ve signed.
  Deploy the application and the enterprise distribution provisioning profile to your users’ computers.
  Instruct users to install the application and profile using iTunes.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (3, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195742)

...and people criticize Linux for putting too many burdens on it's end users.

If you need an "enterprise deployment guide" to just lay out the basics, then you've failed. You've also demonstrated the OPs point.

Not every doctor has an "Enterprise Support Team" to fall back on.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Informative)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 3 years ago | (#34197130)

The only burden on the end user is to select the app for installation in iTunes and their is even a way to automate that. All the other steps are for the developer.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

tkdog (889567) | more than 3 years ago | (#34198228)

Well, any doctor that wants to use enterprise software probably does have an IT team to fall back on. This actually seems pretty straightforward and usable. They (doctors) are going to need to have a system with a traceable security path so having applications with signed certs is needed. Otherwise, it looks like a fairly simple method of distributing software across many "workstations".

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

PhunkySchtuff (208108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34199996)

Did you actually read the guide?
Here's what you, as the end user, needs to do (hilighted in bold)
The process for deploying your own applications is:
    Register for enterprise development with Apple.
    Sign your applications using your certificate.
    Create an enterprise distribution provisioning profile that authorizes devices to use applications you’ve signed.
    Deploy the application and the enterprise distribution provisioning profile to your users’ computers.
    Instruct users to install the application and profile using iTunes.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Insightful)

the_womble (580291) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195428)

The reason it should not be legal is that it is a promise to buy from a particular supplier. It would be OK (not necessarily good policy, but not wrong in the same way) for him to promise to buy tablets from whichever vendor offered the best deal on suitable hardware and software.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Interesting)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196492)

Indeed, unless there's only one supplier who offers to meet some specific need, I would have thought it would be a legal requirement to put such requests out to tender, otherwise you're just asking for even more corruption and nepertism.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

node 3 (115640) | more than 3 years ago | (#34199454)

The reason it should not be legal is that it is a promise to buy from a particular supplier. It would be OK (not necessarily good policy, but not wrong in the same way) for him to promise to buy tablets from whichever vendor offered the best deal on suitable hardware and software.

I still don't see why that would be illegal (let alone wrong). He's not making a promise to Apple, he's making it to his constituents.

As for the idea of him instead saying, "tablets from whoever will offer the best deal", right now that is the iPad. There are no other tablets that can reasonably be said to compete with the iPad. The closest thing is the Samsung Galaxy Tab, which is more expensive, smaller, less storage...

Basically, "the best tablet" just means iPad anyway, and will for some time to come. A vocal number of Slashdotters seem to think that the iPad is overpriced and underpowered, but half a year later not a single competitor has been able to match it, and there's no reason to expect that to change any time soon. Apple will have released the second iPad before the competition has even caught up with the first.

You might want an open source OS, or multiple app stores, but I can promise you those aren't important to the vast majority of consumers, and a hospital is not going to care either.

So, I'm still curious on how this can be illegal. I mean, other than "I don't like anyone promising to buy something in government".

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194622)

The main problem is any tablet with a capacitive screen is basically useless for real work.

You need pen/stylus input to sign, take "handwriting to text" notes and annotate documents.

An ipad is even more useless, it is a glorified media player and web device.

  It frustrates me that Apples popularity and marketing has made the capacitive screen a must have feature , it is less versatile and accurate than the alternative, it is however perfectly suited to small touch input devices like media players and phones - not devices requiring a real variety of input.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

SkyDragon (1642677) | more than 3 years ago | (#34250880)

I work in a hospital. We've been playing a little with using iphone type devices, and you can use the capacitive touch screen whilst wearing standard surgical gloves, seems to be no problem. We have been playing with a number of windows based tablet devices specifically designed for a clinical environment, that use a pen interface, however due to there bulk, they all seem to end up being attached to a wall permanently and used there. You would get a lot more out of a desktop computer mounted in the same way. I can see a number of situations where a smaller IPad type device would be useful, however you need to start with a use (problem) and look for a solution, rather than take the technology and look for a way to justify having it. Just throwing an iPad a doctors will do nothing unless you have a comprehensive plan on how it will integrate with existing systems. This can be done, and should be done, but it will be expensive and time consuming.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

BeanThere (28381) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195222)

Sounds more like a case of Bread and Circuses to me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses).

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (2, Interesting)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195370)

I agree it does seem an odd choice of vendor, however many other options (MS Google) could be just as constraining if they choose to write software for them.

Whatever hardware they use, it'd be silly to tie their systems to binaries for one platform anyway. If they serve their data using HTML it won't matter what hardware they use as they can easily change it later. Tablets could actually be a very useful tool in hospitals if used well.

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196562)

You're right that tying yourself to a vendor will lead to constraints. It's worth noting, though, that many hospitals are already (as with many government departments) tied to MS and Windows - at least this seems to be the case in most developed countries, I'd be surprised to learn all Australian hospitals were using Linux or OSX. Therefore it makes sense that the hardware at the very least doesn't prevent a Windows installation. Is this just another case of politician doesn't understand that not all tablets are iPads (arguably the iPad is not a tablet but let's shelve that for now), just like not all smartphones are iPhones and not all portable music players are iPods, hence he's using the wrong terminology through ignorance rather than preference?

Re:Corporate sponsorship for elections (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196730)

Also, do you want Apple to control what kind of software your health care system can use?

Enterprise apps can be distributed without the app store.

Response to genuine need or political pandering? (4, Insightful)

siddesu (698447) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194336)

his party was committed to giving doctors the tools they needed to provide the best care to Victorian patients.

Having done a few projects with medical institutions of various sizes, my impression is that there are quite a lot of stringent and rather divergent requirements for "tools they need to provide the best care" depending on the specialty, in addition to a ton of general and institution-specific requirements regarding, between others, payments, data security and privacy.

Giving everyone an iPad doesn't strike me like a policy implementation in response to a specific need, but rather as trying to win an influential group with shiny presents.

Are the doctors going to bite on such a small bait?

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194604)

Everything the candidates say at this point is pandering. Doctors represent a block of typically right wing (Liberal party) voters and donors. Appealing to doctors can potentially have a direct affect on Liberal votes.

But I don't think it will make much of a difference. The campaign is on autopilot. Candidates are promising the exact opposite of their historical positions. In my experience the bureaucracy runs the state anyway so it doesn't really matter who wins.

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (2, Informative)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194698)

Giving everyone an iPad doesn't strike me like a policy implementation in response to a specific need, but rather as trying to win an influential group with shiny presents.

Outside of Slashdot's event horizon, many companies have already issued large number of iPads to their employees for specific purposes, and very successfully so. Very often with purpose written applications that don't go through Apple's app store (shell out a little bit more than the usual $99 for an "enterprise" developer account and you can install iPhone and iPad apps from your own servers). I don't make lists of this stuff, just use Google, but I remember Daimler Benz issuing iPads to their sales people very successfully.

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (2, Interesting)

oji-sama (1151023) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194836)

If not for the cool-factor, is there a reason for giving iPads to the doctors instead of some other pad?

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194902)

no. and where they need such data input, they already have pads.

and most of these cases of shelling out large numbers of ipads to representatives comes out the fact that those decisions were sold to them by advertising agencies(which are pretty good at building special apps that serve no purpose, typical case would be issuing them for one trade show, using them as information displays there,instead of printing the text out in a form you could give the attendees to take home, and then just forgetting about them).

it's just riding the hype for getting press time.

Electronics *ARE* useful to doctors (4, Informative)

DrYak (748999) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195400)

If not for the cool-factor, is there a reason for giving iPads to the doctors instead of some other pad?

As someone who has studied medicine, and worked a bit in the clinic (although now I mainly do research, I still have to work as a military doctor, thanks to Switzerland having such an antiquated concept as a "compulsory military service")
let me say to you :

We are completely dependant on electronic assisting devices. Long before Apple even started marketing mere music player (let alone PDA/smartphone capable devices) PDA such as Palms and Psions have been immensely popular among my peers.
There's an overwhelming quantity of applications :
- General PIM applications : Notes (so you can easily carry your personal schemas, recommendations, memory aids, etc.), calendar, address book
- Lots of reference material (and it's much practical to carry around 1 single PDA, rather than the equivalent amount of books. Specially since some, like drugs compendiums aren't pocket-sized at all but look like dictionaries)
- Assisting applications (formula calculators, patient tracking/note taking, etc.)
- There are even advanced medical application running on iOS like radiology displaying apps (OsiriX). So you can directly show X-Rays on your device (bedside!) instead of having to log onto a nearby computer or even worse - rely only on expensive X-Ray films.
And that's only the software and data which is useful to a single person alone, now factor in that if some platform is widespread, you can even start developing applications which are useful at the hospital level (dictation software inside the PDA which can then automatically send the dictated report over the network ; a network client could access the patient's file when you need to lookup results or history again bedside!).

So yes, providing electronics to doctors *do* help them, and making a *single specific* platform available in all hospital help the hospital itself (the hospitals could start using an iPad-based dictation, use the iPad as device to display X-Ray pics).

Only, I would prefer a more pocket-able form factor than a tablet. That's why I still used Palm PDAs until recently, and now switched to a smartphones (a PalmPre), although the tablet form factor would be more useful to display x-ray pics.
Also, I would prefer a less vendor-controlled device. That's why my smartphone runs WebOS (Konami code for the win !)
Last but not least, compared to other tablets, the iPad is just an oversize iPod Touch. What I mean is that it lacks some important elements like a USB or SDIO port to interface with chip-cards (for log-in/access control, as done on desktops).

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (1)

l33t gambler (739436) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195580)

It has an OS that is specifically written/modified to run on a touch based device, iOS have its entire UI running on the GPU while the CPU issues relatively small drawing calls. So far the other pads, PDAs and smartphones does not. Maybe Windows phone 7 OS is rewritten from scratch, but the older is not. I think they use a hardware accelerated layer on top of the old stuff so you get sweet animations in the initial use, but once you go browsing or managing files you use an old non accelerated portion of the system. Android OS and symbian is not hardware accelerated and they are noticeably jerkier than iOS.

Re:Response to genuine need or political pandering (2, Insightful)

siddesu (698447) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194870)

many companies have already issued large number of iPads to their employees for specific purposes, and very successfully so

Yes, this kind of underlines the seeming pointlessness of the discussed political initiative. iPads are promised without a specific purpose and application in mind.

App store (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194338)

Lord I hope they are using a web interface otherwise they'll have to deal with the insanity of the AppStore (app gets rejected, never updated, etc. Don't get me wrong, I love my iPad but I really don't want to rely on apps (since they might get revoked/etc.) at least with web based interfaces you can replace the client quite easily.

Ignore Victorian politics for a while (5, Informative)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194358)

I'm a Victorian but I have only been skimming the news. Basically our politicians are saying whatever they think might help them get [re]elected even if it sounds totally stupid. For example the Liberal party is proposing to build train lines in metropolitan Melbourne. In my 45 years of living in this city the only thing the Liberals have done with trains is close them down (and then Labor reopen them), so a Liberal politician who says he is going to build a train line is clearly talking crap.

The iPads will be forgotten on the Sunday morning after the Saturday election.

Re:Ignore Victorian politics for a while (2, Insightful)

_merlin (160982) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194962)

That isn't a fair comment. Many underutilised branch lines were closed under the "New Deal" but mainline services were made cheaper and more frequent. As a result, patronage actually increased by 20% after the changes. Victorian Labor has a history of doing nothing with rail anyway. They promised a train to Wantirna, scaled it back to a tram line, and then decided not to take in under Eastlink, so it terminates uselessly in Vermont South. They buried the report recommending electrification to Geelong. Unified ticketing in Melbourne was introduced by a Liberal government.

Re:Ignore Victorian politics for a while (1)

zsau (266209) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195706)

Indeed; despite the impression everyone has of the Labor and Liberal parties, it needs to remembered that a large part of Labor's base are the teachers and nurses unions, and these are people who want roads (for their jobs). The Liberals have neither ideological nor practical reason to oppose public transport, only to oppose publicly-owned public transport, but seeing as Melbourne's PT is already privatised under their model, the only risk from the Liberals is that once they leave it'll look the same as it did before. Which (modulo a handful of "better late than never" extensions and a disfunctional billion dollar plus "smart" card system) is what Labor's legacy looks like.

(I admit, I do Labor a disservice, but they other improvements they've made have entirely been reactive. They have put money into maintenance and other such features only after the system begins to break down. If Labor cared about having a functional PT system--desparately needed in Melbourne for our economy to work--they would be ordering trains that worked in Australian weather conditions...)

Re:Ignore Victorian politics for a while (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 3 years ago | (#34200604)

The Libs were in the news promising to look again at the Doncaster line and a refuse to believe they will build it. They will probably put another two lanes on the Eastern freeway and say its fixed. I am not claiming that Labor are any better BTW.

The olderer I get the more cynical I get.

Re:Ignore Victorian politics for a while (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34201912)

patronage increased because population increased and we have a ridiculously centralized city with inadequate parking so driving in to work isn't a viable option to many commuters.

Taking the best of a bunch of terrible options is hardly glowing praise for our public transport system

Re:Ignore Victorian politics for a while (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 3 years ago | (#34197198)

I'm a Victorian

I, for one, welcome our time-travelling messenger from the late Nineteenth Century...oh, hold on.

iMRSA appstore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194360)

only Apple approved bacterium will iNFECT you

What are we in High School. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194374)

Isn't this basically buying votes (with Tax Payer money). I know some one has a quote out there about taking money from people and giving it back can't remember who though.

Re:What are we in High School. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194790)

"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -Tocqueville

Why is it always Apple? (1)

Evil_Ether (1200695) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194422)

You would hope he at least did a Google search for tablet pc before choosing iPads. It seams that been first to market is the key these days.

Re:Why is it always Apple? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194896)

This is always the first question on my mind when I hear about something someone promised or did with the iPad. There are excellent Android alternatives that are a lot cheaper to boost. Why iPad with the price tag and closed environment?

Re:Why is it always Apple? (2, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195376)

Tablet PCs have been around for nearly 10 years. Apple wasn't the first to market with a pad/tablet. They were first to market with one that people actually wanted to buy.

Why does it make sense for large organisations to buy iPads rather than another tablet? For the same reason it makes sense for them to buy Windows PCs as desktops. Because they are the market leader, which means most tablet software will be released for it, most tablet hardware add-ons will be compatible with it, and they can be sure that iPads will be on the market, and fully supported, for a very long time.

Governments shouldn't buy a product (5, Insightful)

anti-NAT (709310) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194426)

They should specify standards that multiple competing products can comply with. How can anybody but Apple win this under a competitive tender?

Re:Governments shouldn't buy a product (1)

PhunkySchtuff (208108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194730)

You seem to be new to this game - how it really goes, if they have to go to an open tender is:

They will specify standards that multiple competing products can't comply with. How can anybody but Apple win this under a competitive tender?

Re:Governments shouldn't buy a product (1)

anti-NAT (709310) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194968)

Not that new, but will repeat the (right) philosophy, so that newbies expect it like I both used to and still do.

Re:Governments shouldn't buy a product (1)

PhunkySchtuff (208108) | more than 3 years ago | (#34200052)

Anyone in Government who puts something like this out to tender has already decided what they want to use so the requirements for the open tender can easily be written in such a way that their solution is the only one that "ticks all the boxes"

Something like - the successful tender must be able to provide a handheld computing device with a touch screen that can sync applications with iTunes.

Re:Governments shouldn't buy a product (1)

sempir (1916194) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194754)

They should specify standards that multiple competing products can comply with. How can anybody but Apple win this under a competitive tender?

My dear Friend ...please do not use the word "standards " when discussing politicians, it lowers the tone, and quality, of the conversation. :~)

Re:Governments shouldn't buy a product (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196804)

They should specify standards that multiple competing products can comply with.

Why should they have to? The government buys specific vendors' products all the time, from Microsoft to Lockheed Martin.

Kavka's toxin puzzle (4, Insightful)

Phoe6 (705194) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194444)

Reminds me of Kavka's toxin puzzle [wikipedia.org]. ...the Political Manifesto. Before an election, a political party will release a written document outlining their policies and plans should they win office. Many of these promises may be difficult or impossible to implement in practice. Having won, the party is not obligated to follow the manifesto even if they would have lost without it.

Re:Kavka's toxin puzzle (2, Informative)

grimJester (890090) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194856)

The part you're quoting has an "Original research" label. Not that the analogy isn't realistic, but the Wikipedia text is probably some random dude's ramblings. There's no way to know if they would have lost without it and (in the matrix below) implementing a policy without promising to do so first is considered impossible.

Non-core promise (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195104)

In Oz we call an unimplemented election promise a "non-core promise", John Howard coined the term. I live in Victoria and personally I really don't give a flying fuck if they do or don't spend a paltry $12M on ipads, I'm just gratefull we have bipartisan support for universal health care.

Re:Non-core promise (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196758)

In Oz we call an unimplemented election promise a "non-core promise", John Howard coined the term.

Outside of politicis we call it a "lie".

History repeats itself (1)

cowboy76Spain (815442) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194532)

Aborigens are bouth again with shiny objects...

The sad thing is that is the way it works... I work at an hospital and what the doctors understand more is how cool is the new gadget/pc (and how nobody that is not a doctor cannot have a cooler gadget, no matter its function). The fact that there must be an IS behind in order to these gadgets to be useful is secondary, at best.

.

If a Vote for Him is a Vote for Apple... (-1, Flamebait)

PlaneShaper (1830294) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194554)

I'm not Australian, but I'm pretty sure that if a candidate promised me a free iPad just for my vote, that's the first person I would not be voting for. Not because I disagree with the tactic, but because I don't want an iPad...or anything related to Apple for that matter.

Might as well give me more underwear and socks for Christmas, at least I can patch those myself if they get a tear.

Bizarre to even consider (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194588)

In my own country (and I am sure in most others) there have been countless reports of massive cost overruns in the medical sector due to systems implementation issues, specifically, a) making systems talk to each other in the right way, b) making systems display the right information in the right format that has in a) been retrieved in the right way, and probably c) security.

To integrate iPads into a hospital area will take a ton of development time just to make the right apps. You cannot have an iPad lock up or crash when you have an emergency patient on the table. If that happens, who gets sued - the hospital, the politicians, or Apple? Then there is compatibility, and then there is security - A&E areas have a ton of people walking in and out, and after a drunken night it would be a small action for anyone to swipe one and stick it under their coat. Great if that just displays the last patient's test results. Then lastly you would at every step have to deal with and within Apple's terms.

I am not saying that there isn't a place for tablets in hospitals, but by god, if we spend billions on researching a single incremental drug, maybe we could spend a little bit of money researching the right tools for doctors which arguably are even more important.

Re:Bizarre to even consider (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#34196838)

I think the idea is that the device would be used to record patient notes or do independent research, mostly used by doctors doing ward rounds and the like, not that they'd be running specialist equipment off of it during surgery.

Re:Bizarre to even consider (1)

Lucractius (649116) | more than 3 years ago | (#34228822)

Speaking as someone who actually supports these systems.
No one gets sued for things crashing.
Doctors & other staff are trained to function without constant assistance from fancy gadgets. Thats why the doctors spend 5+ years learning medicine.
The gadgets make things easier, things don't suddenly grind to a halt & staff become useless morons without them.

Why iPad and not anything else ? (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194592)

I'm curious as to the reason why "so they have easy access to time-critical clinical information at a patient’s bedside" REQUIRES an iPad, and not anything else.

Re:Why iPad and not anything else ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34194636)

Because iPads sound cool, grab headlines, and generate discussion as proven here. This is precisely the goal of these statements.

Yes, because if there's one thing Doctors are... (2, Insightful)

BigBadRich (849128) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194686)

...it's strapped for cash. I happen to know a number of doctors, and yes, plenty of them have iPads.

I suggest that if an iPad is indeed critical business tool for a Doctor, he might be able to spring for the six hundred bucks without too much trouble.

He doesn't need John Brumby to buy it for him (or her). In contrast, there are plenty of school kids who could use that sort of investment in technology. Perhaps some of the billions of dollars that were wasted on the latest Public transport fiasco [theaustralian.com.au] could be spent there.

Investment in health care needs more serious consideration than simply buying the doctors more shiny objects.

Re:Yes, because if there's one thing Doctors are.. (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195732)

Oh, I don't think it's that they're subsidizing doctors, who can, without some sort of strange circumstances, afford to purchase an iPad. The upper-middle class does not need any subsidies, thank you very much. They're subsidizing Steve Jobs, who, being one of the richest people in the world, is in desperate need of government support.

Lost my vote (1)

Quick Reply (688867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194692)

I was going to vote for Labour until I read this, I don't want any part in filling Apple's coffers any further.

One of the guys I follow on twitter said it best: (1)

Skythe (921438) | more than 3 years ago | (#34194796)

I love tech, but this is batshit crazy in my opinion. Fix the underlying issues w/health. iPads won't.

Poor Choice (1)

Bill Dimm (463823) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195122)

I was just reading an article in the Philadelphia Business Journal this morning about the switch to electronic medical records, and it said one thing they've found from experience is that a desktop computer with a mouse is much more convenient for the doctor than mobile/touch devices. I would provide a link but it is subscriber-only, so the PBJ losses an opportunity for some traffic.

Just don't expect to read their handwriting (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#34195232)

If you thought it was hard to read a doctor's handwriting when they used a pen, just wait until you see what it looks like when they fingerpaint on their capacitive iPad screen.

More seriously, what the hell problem is this politician even trying to address by handing out iPads? If doctors want access to a patients medical info, it's likely there is clipboard on the bed which has it and failing that a duty station on the ward where it could be accessed. Expecting doctors to haul around a fragile computer (and remember to charge it) is just asking for trouble. They'll be forgotten, broken (when they slide off beds), they'll be implicated with the spread of germs and carry all sorts of other baggage. I also expect that wifi enabling every public and private hospital ward is easier said than done for a whole raft of reasons.

iPads aren't worth it (1)

Anomalyx (1731404) | more than 3 years ago | (#34198084)

As if doctors couldn't afford their own iPad? They aren't that useful in a hospital setting anyways. I work in an IT department for a hospital (~6000 total employees) and while we find that several top executives are trying to push for being able to do more hospital stuff on their iPad, we were never able to justify, on a cost-to-benefit analysis, buying more than 2 iPads, and that was so our current web developers could run compatibility tests (not actually building anything for it, just tweaking existing web pages). They add zero functionality. We already have systems in place that do everything the "iPad pushers" want, and they do it quite well.

Payroll is always the largest expense. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34200438)

I am sick and tired of the people talking about cost of hardware as being important in the case of desktops/laptops but it is even more ludicrous when the iPad is "cheaper" than the competition right now for what you get in the entire package.

Let me inject a little bit reality into the situation. It does not matter whether a desktop costs 500, 1000, 2000 or even 5000. What matters is the TCO which includes how many man hours are required to support that desktop and similar desktops through the enterprise. It is dead easy to lock down a mac desktop without having to go through a "lock down" procedure by simply assigning users regular user status on the system. They can even install some simple applications in their own home folder Applications without administrators having to worry about it bring down the entire system. If a home folder becomes corrupt, you simply restore from a nightly backup using one of many third party solutions like deep freeze.

For every additional IT personnel that you hire to handle windows problems, you could buy a lot of macs and upgrade them every single year.

Wages are the largest expense in any organization so when you are choosing your IT solution, you should factor in how much it will cost to support it. Saving 10,000 dollars on hardware while wasting 500,000 or more on extra bodies to support that "cheap" hardware is a false economy.

Elected or Not (1)

FlyingGuy (989135) | more than 3 years ago | (#34203080)

The iPad is really the best platform for doctors on rounds.

It is small, light weight, can display hi-res images therefor great for viewing radiology images and can have lots and lots of other things built right in.

While I really like the iPad Apples needs to change one thing. They need to get rid of that fragile connector. It is way to thin for the amount of average that can be applied by the cable. I promise a Doctor will break the damn thing in a heartbeat.

Apple needs to make the connections inductive since everything running through that connection oscillates it should be very simple. They only other thing they need to do is either make the recharge inductive as well or make the power connector the same as the laptops then make so that when sleepy tired doctor grabs the thing it will simply pop loose without them noticing.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...