I was excited to see a hardware refresh on Apple’s iPod Touch last week, but it’s unfortunate that the new models have technology that isn’t fully implemented, such as 802.1n draft or a camera. Moreover, the clock speed increase in the new models (600mhz) and Voice Control/microphone capabilities aren’t available in the budget 8gb model.

Simply put, that is ingenious marketing.

The new Nano includes an FM transmitter and a camera, features that the neither the classic nor the touch sport. This obviously allows Apple to advertise a wide product line and focus its tech support on specific products. The base software kernel in all of its products is similar, and allows for efficient cross-platform upgrades.

As a consumer, however, I’d want everything in my portable device. As a medical professional, I’d choose the iPod Touch/iPhone to be my technology device. Obviously, Skyscape and Epocrates, two medical software companies, have already gravitated to this platform. The hardware acceleration on the Touch allows for gaming, but also image viewing (CT/MRI). We can easily modify the iPod Touch output to a projector for presentations.  The downside of this technology? Price.

The 16gb and 32gb models are similar in pricing to full-sized netbooks or 12″ thinbooks, which can arguably “do more” than the ipods. It’s a tough sell.

Which product would you choose if you could only have one?

computing computing, tech

Ophthalmic pathologist Mort Smith sports a tablet PC for his lectures. I suppose that a nifty touch screen can come in handy when you’d like to circle some Merkel cells in your presentation for emphasis. Tablet PC’s are traditionally geared toward the mobile user who simply needs technology for note-taking and flashy presentations. These systems typically range from the 2lb-<4lb range, with limited video acceleration and slower disk platters (with the exception of those with solid-state drives).

I don’t find that tablet PC’s are entirely useful for medicine, since netbooks and superlights a la MacBook Air are plentiful. However, there is potential for tablet PC’s to be useful for the niche market of ophthalmology. We draw. We label diagrams with color, all in our progress notes. A touchscreen serves as the bridge between the ophthalmic exam and EMR. This union is not novel–Mayo Clinic’s ophthalmology department implements its own ophthalmic EMR that synchronizes seamlessly with the entire hospital’s records.

TabletPCreview.com, the de facto standard review site for tablets is a good starting point to explore the current product line. These systems do command a higher price tag than their non-tablet counterparts, but it is impressive how much power you can fit into the package. I’ve been entertaining the idea of acquiring a tablet for a while, and I almost made the jump until rumors surfaced about Apple’s venture into the table realm. That is a killer hardware that I’m itching to get my hands on.

It will be an interesting product cycle in the upcoming year…

computing, medicine ophthalmology, tech

Some IT departments are simply bad. I have been struggling over the last few weeks to obtain login access to the computer I use in the clinic. Without access, I’m unable to view any of my patients’ medical records.

I called the helpline responsible for the computing systems (5-HELP). After several prompts and minutes of waiting, I explained to the support staff my problem. He replied, “Oh, that’s a hospital computer, you need to call 4-HELP.”

I subsequently dialed 4-HELP, and waited through a suspiciously similar system prompts. The support staff on 4-HELP explained to me that even though the computers in question were in the hospital, they were controlled by the university. Hence, I would need to dial 5-HELP for support.

I explained to him that I had already done that, and he retorted, “You’ll have to speak to you departmental administrator.” I asked my program director’s secretary what I needed to do, and she told me that she had done “everything possible to activate my accounts” (translate: I’ve done nothing). I would have to dial 5-HELP for help.

Painful.

computing, medicine computing

The other day my laptop got “wormed” while I took down my firewall to do some software patches. I had forgotten to disconnect from the Internet, and after 30 mins of patching, my computer started acting weird. Before I knew it, a gazillion pop-up windows materialized on my desktop, and the computer became non-responsive, even after reboots. This is the one of the worst things that can happen to a computer literate user. I got hacked. This is what I get for not upgrading my copy of IE 6.0.

Sadly enough, the mirrored drive on my hard drive was not accessible (boot sector was hijacked), and I did not have a second computer to link up my laptop drive to recover some files. I spent the next 3 hours installing a non-IBM version of Windows XP and hunting Thinkpad drivers online. In the process of fiddling around, I discovered that my USB ports were blown–typical USB header on the laptop gets pushed back into the motherboard after long-term use. One of the capacitors were oozing as well.

Hardware and software failure almost inevitably means a new computer. What will my next computer be? Will it be a Mac? In the meantime, my computer is still functional, albeit in a limited form.

computing computing, rant

I used to enjoy tweaking computers, whether it involved fiddling with the latest linux distro or optimizing boot times on my operating system. Not anymore. The other day I was trying to figure out why my relative’s computer was running so sluggishly. I had configured it over a year ago, and it booted in less than a minute. Now, it took nearly 2 minutes to reach the desktop. Execution of applications after a double-click crawled painfully.

The system is an Athlon 1800+ with 1 gig of ram and a GeForce4 video card. There is no reason for the computer to be slow, especially without any newly installed software. It turned out that the McAfee antivirus program was the culprit, which reinforced my distaste of all antivirus programs. Moreover, McAfee’s uninstall program failed to remove a component that lingers in the system processes to prevent worms from disabling the antivirus program. The program was, in essence, a virus itself. How ironic.

It took me approximately 45 minutes to pinpoint the program and wipe out the badness. However, I hated every step of it. I didn’t enjoy the challenge of solving the problem of a slow computer anymore. It was a chore. In the end, I was glad that my stint in the tech support industry lasted only 1 month in college. Maybe my next computer will be a mac…

computing computing